The Recommended Daily Added Sugar Intake

The Recommended Daily Added Sugar Intake
4.81 (96.17%) 94 votes

Public health authorities continue to drop the upper tolerable limit of daily added sugar intake.

Discuss
Republish

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

Dating back to the original Dietary Goals for the United States in 1977—the so-called McGovern Report— leading nutrition scientists were not only calling for a reduction in meat and other sources of saturated fat and cholesterol, like dairy and eggs, but also sugar. The goal was to reduce America’s sugar intake down to no more than 10% of the daily diet.

“The final conclusions would hang sugar,” reported the President of the Sugar Association. “The McGovern Report has to be neutralized….” Don’t worry, though, we have the National Cattlemen’s Association on our side, and, like Big Sugar, they appealed to the Senate Select Committee to withdraw the report.

“The Sugar Industry Empire” striking back appeared to work. When the official dietary guidelines were released in 1980, and then again in ‘85, no specific limit like 10%, just the vague “avoid too much sugar,” whatever that means. By ‘95 it got even vaguer: “Choose a diet moderate in sugars.” In 2000, they were at least back to “limit,” but even that was too strong. Under pressure from sugar lobbyists, they went back to “moderate your intake of sugars” before the 2005 guidelines committee dropped the s-word completely, encouraging Americans: “Choose carbohydrates wisely,” whatever that means. If only there were some kind of dietary guidelines committee that could give us guidance.

The Sugar Association expressed optimism about that 2005 Committee. The Sugar Association Incorporated is “committed to the protection and promotion of [table sugar] consumption,” and they will not allow for the “disparagement of sugar.” And, they’re not kidding. In 2003, the World Health Organization released a report “Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases,” which, for the first time since the McGovern Report, called for a reduction in sugar intake to under 10%. The Sugar Association responded by threatening to get the U.S. to withdraw all funding from the WHO. Here it is, in black and white. The Sugar Association threatening to pressure Congress to withdraw funding from the World Health Organization––polio vaccinations and AIDS medications be damned; you just don’t mess with the candy man. The threat was described as “tantamount to blackmail and worse than any pressure [they had experienced from Big Tobacco].”

But now, 15 years later, and 40 years after the first proposed McGovern Report, the current 2015 to 2020 Dietary Guidelines lay out as a key recommendation the 10% limit, currently exceeded by every age bracket in the United States, starting at age one, with adolescents averaging 87 grams of sugar a day––meaning the average teen is effectively eating 29 sugar packets a day.

The Sugar Association describes the 10% limit as “extremely low,” I mean, only like up to a dozen spoonfuls a day. But, of course, there’s no dietary requirement for added sugar at all, and every single calorie we get from added sugar is a wasted opportunity to get calories from sources that actually provide nutrition. To the American Heart Association’s credit, they went further trying to push added sugar intake down to about 6% of calories, for which a single can of soda could send you over the limit…an added sugar limit exceeded by 90% of Americans.

In 2017 the American Heart Association released their guidelines for children, recommending they get no more than about six teaspoons per day, which means there’s nearly a hundred cereals on the U.S. market for which a single serving exceeded the entire recommended daily limit. And the heart association recommends no added sugars at all under age two. Small toddlers are to avoid added sugars altogether, a recommendation that’s violated… in up to 80% of toddlers.

The U.S. is one of at least 65 countries that have implemented dietary guidelines or policies to curb sugar consumption. In the UK, the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition made new recommendations to reduce added sugars down to 5%, which is the direction the World Health Organization is headed as well. They always seem to be ahead of the curve. Why? Because their policy-making process is at least partially protected from industry influence. Unlike governments, which may have competing interests in commerce and trade, the World Health Organization is exclusively concerned with health.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: Doris Jungo via pixabay. Image has been modified.

Video production by Glass Entertainment.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video.

Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.

Dating back to the original Dietary Goals for the United States in 1977—the so-called McGovern Report— leading nutrition scientists were not only calling for a reduction in meat and other sources of saturated fat and cholesterol, like dairy and eggs, but also sugar. The goal was to reduce America’s sugar intake down to no more than 10% of the daily diet.

“The final conclusions would hang sugar,” reported the President of the Sugar Association. “The McGovern Report has to be neutralized….” Don’t worry, though, we have the National Cattlemen’s Association on our side, and, like Big Sugar, they appealed to the Senate Select Committee to withdraw the report.

“The Sugar Industry Empire” striking back appeared to work. When the official dietary guidelines were released in 1980, and then again in ‘85, no specific limit like 10%, just the vague “avoid too much sugar,” whatever that means. By ‘95 it got even vaguer: “Choose a diet moderate in sugars.” In 2000, they were at least back to “limit,” but even that was too strong. Under pressure from sugar lobbyists, they went back to “moderate your intake of sugars” before the 2005 guidelines committee dropped the s-word completely, encouraging Americans: “Choose carbohydrates wisely,” whatever that means. If only there were some kind of dietary guidelines committee that could give us guidance.

The Sugar Association expressed optimism about that 2005 Committee. The Sugar Association Incorporated is “committed to the protection and promotion of [table sugar] consumption,” and they will not allow for the “disparagement of sugar.” And, they’re not kidding. In 2003, the World Health Organization released a report “Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases,” which, for the first time since the McGovern Report, called for a reduction in sugar intake to under 10%. The Sugar Association responded by threatening to get the U.S. to withdraw all funding from the WHO. Here it is, in black and white. The Sugar Association threatening to pressure Congress to withdraw funding from the World Health Organization––polio vaccinations and AIDS medications be damned; you just don’t mess with the candy man. The threat was described as “tantamount to blackmail and worse than any pressure [they had experienced from Big Tobacco].”

But now, 15 years later, and 40 years after the first proposed McGovern Report, the current 2015 to 2020 Dietary Guidelines lay out as a key recommendation the 10% limit, currently exceeded by every age bracket in the United States, starting at age one, with adolescents averaging 87 grams of sugar a day––meaning the average teen is effectively eating 29 sugar packets a day.

The Sugar Association describes the 10% limit as “extremely low,” I mean, only like up to a dozen spoonfuls a day. But, of course, there’s no dietary requirement for added sugar at all, and every single calorie we get from added sugar is a wasted opportunity to get calories from sources that actually provide nutrition. To the American Heart Association’s credit, they went further trying to push added sugar intake down to about 6% of calories, for which a single can of soda could send you over the limit…an added sugar limit exceeded by 90% of Americans.

In 2017 the American Heart Association released their guidelines for children, recommending they get no more than about six teaspoons per day, which means there’s nearly a hundred cereals on the U.S. market for which a single serving exceeded the entire recommended daily limit. And the heart association recommends no added sugars at all under age two. Small toddlers are to avoid added sugars altogether, a recommendation that’s violated… in up to 80% of toddlers.

The U.S. is one of at least 65 countries that have implemented dietary guidelines or policies to curb sugar consumption. In the UK, the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition made new recommendations to reduce added sugars down to 5%, which is the direction the World Health Organization is headed as well. They always seem to be ahead of the curve. Why? Because their policy-making process is at least partially protected from industry influence. Unlike governments, which may have competing interests in commerce and trade, the World Health Organization is exclusively concerned with health.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image credit: Doris Jungo via pixabay. Image has been modified.

Video production by Glass Entertainment.

Motion graphics by Avocado Video.

Doctor's Note

I recently spoke at a hearing of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Committee. Watch the highlights and my speech here: Highlights from the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Hearing.

The sugar industry keeps pretty busy, as you’ll see from my recent videos: Are Fortified Kids’ Breakfast Cereals Healthy or Just Candy? and Sugar Industry Attempts to Manipulate the Science.

My other popular videos on sugar are:

If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

86 responses to “The Recommended Daily Added Sugar Intake

Comment Etiquette

On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.

To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.

The Short List

To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.

Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer health supporters by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.

Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.

View the Full Community Guidelines

  1. I have a question a little off topic. My husband and I don’t eat any refined sugar, but every summer I make hummingbird nectar out of refined sugar and water. I use the recipe recommended by the Audubon Society of 1/4 cup sugar to a cup of boiling water. Every time I make this I feel guilty putting it out for the birds. Is this a healthy concoction for the hummingbirds?

    1. Good question. It’s so great to feed these animals especially since we have and continue to take up so much land and resources in doing so, so it’s really important people are thoughtful in these ways. But you definitely want to make sure it’s healthy e.g feeding birds white bread is actually very harmful to them because it fills them up but causes malnourishment.

      I know humming birds have it hard, too, because they have such extremely fast metabolisms. Ralph seems to know what he’s talking about, but I would also add that also like fruit that’s going bad which they can suck the juices from—so do bees and butterflies. And planting lots of useful flora to them is great, too and incidentally increases but also balances the fauna which helps everyone and everything. They love butterfly bushes, too—gorgeous flowering plant and smells amazing.

    2. lizhun, Here in Oregon, we have Anna’s Hummingbirds which stopped migrating; so I keep the feeder out in the winter. Sugar is fine for the little birds; I recommend using pure cane sugar as beet sugar is GMO. Occasionally we get a really cold night which can freeze the sugar water, so I have a second feeder to switch out at first light.

  2. lizhun: Yep! Those little buggers have evolved to thrive on plant nectar and bugs (they are actually pretty good midge hunters). Sugar syrup is ideal food for them. That said, DON’T use brown/raw sugars and don’t add red food dye

    1. Stephanie Mayer, that’s a huge improvement for the public at large but probably high for a self-selected group like folks here. Personally, my intake of added sugar is less than 5 grams per day… often zero.

        1. Greg, it differs because “added sugar” is that which has been added to a food from a refined source whereas sugars themself safely and naturally occur within whole foods.

  3. In the current presidential weeding out process, there have been quite a few who promote “Healthcare for All” and other government paid policies. Not a one of them would also propose doing something about the insane policy of subsidizing sugar, or tobacco! Only one, Bloomberg, seems to understand the problem and is honest about it – but by banning large sodas in NYC he was castigated from the left and right for being out of touch and too bossy. A shame. We need a leader like JFK who brought out that fitness program for kids back in the ’60s.

    1. Ok, political OPINIONS aside, people simply need to be educated, not controlled. The problem is big commercial agenda interfering with the facts and providing their own “education” which has been going on for ages. It’s indeed ridiculous that subsidies go toward things that are proven to be harmful, especially animal agriculture, as opposed to plant agriculture (NOT gmo) which would make eating healthy affordable for all, but that is a long imbedded issue that many have their claws death-grippingly sunken into and most leaders don’t even realize that these things are as unnatural and toxic to us as they in fact are.

      The best thing to do is spread the evidence and contact your leaders about the issue and the science which they probably don’t know any more on than that guy at the gym doing keto.

      Telling someone they can’t buy a large pop isn’t going to do much but piss some people off and make others nod in agreement, that’s its climax.

    2. Ugh, we don’t need a ‘Nanny’ government. People need education like Dr. Greger provides. Not a health commissar.

      1. Industry outspends government education programmes via advertising, carefully targeted research and the provision of ‘educational’ materials to schools and colleges, by a huge margin, It also backs or opposes the election of politicians. How are people going to be educated if the small voice of government and people like Dr Greger is drowned out by a raucous cacophany of misinformation from industry via advertising, sensational media reports of dodgy research and a deluge of educational materials from industry. Doubt is their product after all.
        https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-saturated-fat-studies-set-up-to-fail/

        It’s a tough one, true, but I would have thought that limiting serving sizes was itself educational – because it makes people ask why.
        On principle, I would have thought that saving people’s lives was more important than protecting industry profits. To my mind, government is there to serve the people not industry.

        However, if we reframe the question as an issue of liberty and the nanny state, then profiting from increasing cancer, diabetes, CVD and obesity risk becomes defensible and respectable again. We could however also argue that it is in fact a matter of putting the life and health of citizens ahead of industry’s liberty to profit from the sale of unhealthy products (large sizes boost sales and the liberty of individuals is not infringed since they can buy as many smaller servings as they desire)..

        Still, I suppose that if government doesn’t limit package sizes of potentially lethal analgaesics like tylenol/aspirin/paracetamol and other over the counter drugs, then it is very hard to justify limiting soft drink etc serving sizes.

        1. DEMOCRATIC FREEDOM AND REGULATION
          .
          Democratic government is governance / regulation according to the will of the people. Regulation itself is not the problem– citizens demand regulation because that is how government delivers what the people want.
          .
          Clearly, we must have regulation to make things work better, if at all. From traffic lights to safer food and airline travel, our very lives depend on that regulation.
          .
          However, when regulators are captured by industry lobbies, government works against the citizens it is supposed to serve. Today, a clear majority of Americans polled believe government is not responsive on important issues, from health care to foreign policy. No similar complaint emerges from the lobby industry (which often finds government very responsive).

          1. To be fair, the food industries have been lobbying unsuccessfully for the end of dietary guidelines for decades. For that matter, so have various charlatans selling and/or promoting unhealthy diets. So they don’t have it all their own way.

            None of them like the idea of being exposed as pushing diets that harm the health of their customers. It doesn’t stop them but it does slow them down somewhat.

            Industry can get around it if is only scientists and academics who point this out since all they have to do is go out and ‘buy’ scientists, physicians and academics who will paint their products as healthy or harmless – for a consideration. However, when national health authorities publish the facts. it is much ,more difficult for those people to mount a disinformation campaign. It is important that government assumes a leadership role here.

          2. Regulation is only as good as how it’s being used… If you honestly think that the best way our government could begin to more actively care for the health of its citizen for whom it is supposed to be working for, is to strictly regulate the allowed sizes of products to be banned, then I guess advocate for it. But I would suggest instead more profound and needed laws be implemented such as stricter labeling laws, stricter regulations on supplements or for that matter ANY regulation on supplements, and about a million other very doable, very needed things we could list.

            We also don’t want over regulation because that can be risky and that is why I think it’s important to regulate that which is actually going to serve the people in a way that they simply aren’t being protected–things that are inarguably justifiable. Part of that which needs to change is the ability for big industry to influence government, but again, these are deep roots. People need to demand that kind of change before it will actually happen as “power never concedes nothing without demand, it never did and it never will.”

            1. “is to strictly regulate the allowed sizes of products to be banned” … that sentence got away from me lol, but you get my point.

              And by stricter labeling laws, I mean things like honesty in advertising, not things like prop 65 which I have a problem with because almost nothing can pass it simply from growing out of the soil and not due to adulteration, and this makes it seem like something to ignore and there is no warning label that we can see and seriously know to take heed from–it brushes over the issue. So perhaps something LIKE prop 65, but more realistic and therefore effective.

      2. Marilyn Kaye and S:
        How well has urging people to eat less sugar worked over the last 40 years? Who has the power in our culture? Media is controlled by large industries. How many parents want their kids looking at screens, eating junk food, and never leaving the house? So are those now rare things in our society? Our culture is dominated by powerful corporations that trick us into very unhealthy lifestyles. It’s time we got our culture back.

        1. John S,

          the thing that needs to completely shift is that the science needs to be held above all else: industry, politics, agenda, etc… If there were some law that could protect our right to the best available evidence first and foremost… Too many powerful people with their agendas. People need to change and demand change as a consequence. The people really are more powerful, the problem is they just don’t know it.

      3. Marilyn Kaye,

        I don’t know what you mean by a “nanny government.” But I watched a special on PBS about the history of food safety in this country, and to me it feels as though we are traveling backwards to the time when it was fine to sell spoiled foods, tainted food, foods contaminated by all kinds of poisonous chemicals, etc. So many people sickened and died because of that. And the reason? Profits!

        I for one am thrilled by the food safety regulations now in place. I wish that they were uniformly enforced. And I would support more regulations that prevent the sale of unhealthy food. And supplements.

        1. Preventing unhealthy supplements is one thing because they are somewhat of a drug or could be considered as much and potentially immediately dangerous. Stricter regulations are desperately needed on supplements. But you can’t prohibit the sales of unhealthy foods, I mean look what happened with the prohibition. People do not want to be and will not be controlled and that is understandable. What instead needs to be done is the very immediate, most practical thing to do… STOP SUBSIDIZING ANIMAL AGRICULTURE and whatever other unhealthy crap is being subsidized and START SUBSIDIZING whole plant foods. This is the dramatic change we need and it leaves people their freedom and increases it at that–addiction aside, truly, a lot of the reason many people do not eat right is because it isn’t as affordable as filling up on junk.

          We don’t need a nanny government, we just a need a honest, rational government that is truly working for its people and not the other way around.

          1. I want to add that I am all for the ban of animal agriculture, however, and it is 100% justifiable to do so, but not on the basis of health but rather on the basis of the rights of the sentient lives living the holocaust that is animal agriculture. I don’t see that happening today, but we can definitely redirect subsidies and even putting the animals aside, it is a crime against the people that these things are being subsidized. And obviously the real science should be taught to the public and they should be warned.

    1. Kirby, it’s my understanding that date sugar is a whole food; it’s just the date dried out or what not. Dr. Greger has advocated using that instead of other sweeteners and molasses as well.

    2. Kirby- Looks like commenters Deb and “s” gave you good advice, although even with date sugar you don’t want to go overboard. It’s a whole food product but when added to foods will of course make them taste sweeter. If used in excess, your taste buds may begin to tolerate increasing sweet tastes causing you to desire more and more sweetness. You said you “sometimes” use date sugar as a sweetener, though, so I’m thinking you don’t overdose (like always add Tablespoons to your smoothies instead of relying on the fruits for sweetness for example) and you can continue occasional use if you choose to.
      Best of health, date sugar and all…

          1. Oh, but it’s worth mentioning that if you use added sweetener regularly and eat sweetened desserts regularity, that extra sugar does in fact change our tastebuds which causes naturally sweet things like fruit to taste less sweet. Maybe you’re used to too much added sweetener.

  4. This one is packed with one line after another that penetrates.

    The concept of having policy guidelines change in a clear direction of increasing obfuscation = how the modern greed and power oriented leadership in society gets away with everything.

    The concept that they changed from using the “s” word to “choose carbohydrates wisely” and THAT is the cause of so much of the diet wars confusion. Keto people and most diabetics think of carbs as sugar already and millions and millions of people get sick and die young.

    The other concept that people are eating that much sugar starting at age 1 and most likely into the womb is eye-opening.

    As someone who comes from a background with that much sugar, I laughed at the concept of telling teenagers that there is no dietary requirement for sugar at all.

    You just don’t mess with the candy man.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYihDAhVPko

  5. I don’t use much sugar at all. Not even date sugar or maple syrup, but I like 5 bean casserole and that uses brown sugar and I ate that a few times last week and it tasted so good.

    I don’t want to do the math to see if that is bad for me.

    One of the things I am finally going to try is Nice Cream. I realized that I can blend the bananas before freezing them and not need all that tamping.

    I honestly didn’t want to do any desserts because I was afraid I would get my sweet tooth back and I am not sure if the 5-bean casserole has tricked me into wanting Nice cream or not, but I am happy that I can just use my immersion blender and put it in the freezer after it is mixed up, so we shall see if I become a Nice cream addict or if I am still doing okay.

    1. Deb,

      nice cream is an excellent idea and I wouldn’t worry about your sweet tooth. If you’re anything like me, what I notice dramatically happen when I incorporated lots of more fruit including my beloved nice cream strawberry milkshakes, I got LESS of a sweet tooth in that I began to only prefer fruit and didn’t want sweetened desserts such as my chocolate fudge almond butter sweetened with maple syrup. And on the occasions I did want them, I could only tolerate having a tiny amount and after that it just stopped appealing to me like those times you feel you had too much sugar and couldn’t stand another bite of sweet.

      1. Or maybe replaced it with a teaspoon or so of molasses. I remember as a kid hating baked beans because of all the sugar….always felt like gagging, when I did eat them.

        I never liked that sweet potato and marshmallow concoction my mother made at Thanksgiving either; refused to eat it. Was it supposed to be in lieu of pumpkin pie or what? If so, I’d rather have the pumpkin pie later for dessert and eat the sweet potatoes the way they were supposed to be eaten. Not all gussied up with sweet crap.

        https://thebloodsugardiet.com/forums/topic/dont-baked-beans-have-a-lot-of-sugar/

    2. For a couple of years now I have ditched all sweeteners – real and artificial – and switched to Yakon syrup. It’s great. Low calorie, low sugars, tastes great. If you haven’t tried it, it might be worth checking out. It’s not cheap, but a little goes a long way.

  6. You said governments have industrial interests just before your final statement in this video claimed the WHO is concerned only with health. You stated the USA had threatened the WHO’s funding on a disagreement over research. The government of the US hence exerts industrial influence on the WHO, no?

  7. About two weeks ago I quit all added sugars—well, almost—in response to a blood test that showed my blood sugar was up to 98 mg/dl; the doctor yelled at me, saying, “That’s one point below diabetic!” I was duly chastised; I’ve been eating a plant-based diet for over 18 years, and seriously had not been watching my sugar intake—lulled in part by the reports of people who reversed diabetes by going plant-based.

    I got my previous report released, from a different clinic; this one showed that the glucose had been 93 mg/dl; clearly my blood glucose was creeping up, and no doctor had caught it until this last one.

    Unfortunately, I won’t be getting a follow-up test until this coming fall, but I have scheduled a visit in a few weeks with the first doctor, to ask her what her strategy would have been when a subsequent test showed a diabetic blood glucose. I’m not a fan of taking chronic daily meds, especially for a preventable condition like diabetes, and fortunately I like unsweetened chocolate—to replace the dark chocolate I had been eating. I’m going to start experimenting with baking with alternative sweeteners like monkfruit, since I don’t really like the aftertaste of stevia.

    The best part of drastically reducing my sugar intake is that several days after I took the first step, I felt a palpable “whoosh” and increased clarity. I seriously hadn’t known how much I was clouding my reality.

    1. Scuba Diva, – 98mg/dl is 2 points below pre-diabetic level with a fasting blood test. The diabetic level isn’t reached until one’s fasting glucose is 126 mg/dl. A better and more reliable measure is to get a fasting A1c blood test which measures your blood sugar level for the last 3 months. In that case 5.8 is the cutoff to prediabetic level and diabetes at 6.0.

      My normal fasting glucose is around 92 although before going WFPB my fasting glucose did get up to 125 mg/dl – right on the border of diabetes. But, as we know, increasing blood sugar is a SYMPTOM of diabetes and the major cause of diabetes is high and long term levels of saturated fat and other fats in the diet. Dr. Greger explains it here: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/what-causes-insulin-resistance/

      After going WFPB, no processed foods, exercise, get rid of the excess fat in the diet, my A1c is a very comfortable 4.7. My diabetic scare was over 10 years ago. Life, as an elder, with no medications, is good.
      Best to you –

  8. Why, exactly, is sugar bad for us?

    What about honey – is it as “bad” as sugar? I consume at leas 2.2 pounds of unapsterized raw honey every ten or so days…

    1. Other than the three or so squares of 78% dark chocolate for dessert in the evening, I alternate between a teaspoon of raw, unheated honey (it’s more expensive, because it’s supposedly “real”) and blackstrap molasses in my hot grains at breakfast time (along with a truck-load of other good stuff). I go very easy on the dried fruit (figs, dates, or raisins) that I also add to the steel-cut oats, etc., though. Just a few tiny pieces….too sweet otherwise.

      The only other “sugar” is what I get via fresh fruit.

    2. The main problem with ‘added sugar’ has traditionally been seen as dental caries but it is also increasingly becoming recognised as a risk factor for obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular diseases However, the evidence on this is still limited (because little research has been done so far).

      “Although the evidence for added sugars and health outcomes is still developing, the recommendation to limit calories from added sugars is consistent with research examining eating patterns and health. Strong evidence from mostly prospective cohort studies but also randomized controlled trials has shown that eating patterns that include lower intake of sources of added sugars are associated with reduced risk of CVD in adults, and moderate evidence indicates that these eating patterns are associated with reduced risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and some types of cancer in adults. As described earlier, eating patterns consist of multiple, interacting food components, and the relationships to health exist for the overall eating pattern, not necessarily to an isolated aspect of the diet. Moderate evidence indicates a relationship between added sugars and dental caries in children and adults.”
      https://health.gov/our-work/food-nutrition/2015-2020-dietary-guidelines/guidelines/chapter-1/a-closer-look-inside-healthy-eating-patterns/

      Note that honey is considered an ‘added sugar’.

      You might also want to be aware of the risk of ‘toxic honey’
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3477659/

    3. #Sceptic… every little pure sugar harms your endothelium “High-glucose and fructose concentrations significantly decreased cell features such as angiogenic capability.” look here for example: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31655124

      When it comes to honey, not only that honey is actually the food of the young bees, it is also literally bee vomit, because it comes directly from the stomage of the bees. honey is for the young bees, what milk is for the kalves – food – and it is not designed for the humans. Maybe this pictures help you in the future to make a good decision when it comes to food and the question, is it good for me or not. Use the real name of the things – an egg is nothing more then a hens period result, a steak is a pice of dead body or cadaver and cheese is made from milk of a raped cow… You don’t need such things for a healthy diet.

      I’m sorry if my words sound a bit rude – but have you ever seen a documentary about how they make honey? In Germany we have a very good documentary called “More Than Honey” unfortenally only in German language.

      But you have a very, very proud and brave man in the USA, called Gary Yourofsky, may you like to watch one of his speeches: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es6U00LMmC4

      Cheers from Germany

        1. And you can’t see any difference, right? If people used honey in the past, then they have eaten honey not (!) every day, they went not to a super store to buy one of the million glasses coming from a honey industry… they have stolen some and paid often with pain, because bees are not (!) happy if there is some creature taking there food away… please use your brain to think by your self. ;-) Humans did and do a lot stupid things, the question remains is that all right? Answer – no, mainly nothing is right what humans do! Ok, other war show place (Kriegsschauplatz)…. Nevertheless, from the point of a healthy whole food, plant-based, low fat diet it is not a good idea to eat honey, not even frequently, because it’s sugar… the rest I think you will find by your self.

          1. My, my! Interesting rant! However, I plan to continue having a half-teas./teaspoon raw, unheated honey every other day on my hot cereal.

            Will I go to hell forever and ever because of it? Ain’t no such animal. And are you the perfect “saint” in all that you do and say? Relatively speaking? I mean, do you step on poor little ants or swat at mosquitoes?

            BTW, regarding your “it is not a good idea to eat honey, not even frequently” — Am pretty sure you meant to say “infrequently,” did you not? :-)

            1. Upps, sorry, I’m not a native speaker, you are right – infrequently…

              I’m of course, not a “saint” but is there not a big or “holy” men…
              nobody can life on this earth without making mistakes. But is there not a big difference between killing an ant by  accident, because you go over a green and utilize bees for honey? Have you any imagination in which manner most of the honey nowadays is made? 

              Big trucks, running miles for miles, from one point to the next, during the year  – only for business, to make money, money, money… – that I think is not right! May you like to see this trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NT05qEJxUk you can see this trucks I mean…

              So the question remains – is it really necessary to eat honey, even if I know it’s not the best for my health and for the life of the bees, if I have plenty of other possibilities? Ah, last thought – I hope I can explain it right in this language. Most, nearly all, beekeepers change the honey they take from the bees to sugar water. Sugar water has not all the substances like honey – so, the food of the bees is suboptimal – in addition because of the big mono cultures, the ways a bee has to fly is going wider and wider, sometimes to wide, if they are lucky and find a field – shit happens, most farmers use Glyphosat :-(

              …the effect is: they went sick, they die sooner, they have more stress… but, when the bees die, people will have more then no honey in the future, we will starve soon… what will then happen to the whole world?

        2. YR

          Are you implying that this must mean it is either harmless or healthful? Isn’t that the appeal to antiquity fallacy?

          People have been eating each other since at least the time of the Neanderthals. That doesn’t make it either harmless or healthful. Or OK for that matter.

            1. YR,

              “I’m thinking that if Mother Nature gave us something like honey, maybe there’s a reason for it”

              No, Mother Nature did not give us honey, Mother Nature made bees and bees make honey and indeed there is a reason for it, it’s to feed bees!

              That is like a cannibal using the argument that “nature gave me human flesh so it must be reasonable to eat.”

              Nature, God, science—whatever you believe—creates all kinds of life and there is a reason for all or most things but these reasons don’t revolve around what the almighty human can do with or rather exploit from these things.

              1. #Shaylen Good spoken!
                Sometimes I’ve been wondering about the arguments of some people – then I remember me that may I said similar things when I was in my twenties. I think, no I know now it’s a development of the person to change the view of this world and what’s going on here. But today, thanks www. is it more easy to get informations… also thank’s Mr. Gregers (and all the others) work.

                1. Thanks, Heilpraktiker_Ju :) That is true… we were all indoctrinated since the start of our lives. I remember a lot of the things I used to believe and it’s astonishing to me that I ever thought that way. Yes, Dr. Greger and his team’s work is absolutely brilliant and wonderful.

          1. People have been eating ice cream for a long time too. Even though you (on rare occasion, of course) do so yourself, does that make it “harmless or healthful”? I should say not! :-)

      1. #Barb

        2.2 pounds are 0,997 kg – still a lot… honey is about 80 % sugar, 17 % water…. sugar:

        # Fructose 27 bis 44 Prozent # Glucose 22 bis 41 Prozent # Saccharose bis zu 5 Prozent # Maltose 4 bis 14 Prozent # other sugars, for example Melezitose, Erlose, Turanose zwischen 1 bis 14 Prozent

        1 kg per month will be 33,33 g/d is 133 kcal = is more then 10% sugar/day – he missed the target! ;-)

        1. Heilpraktiker_Ju, see what I mean?! I admit I love the taste of sweet things, and though I very rarely give in to temptation, I understand the craving of it. But, 3 kg a month!
          I buy fair trade sugar and put a tsp (measured) on oatmeal if I don’t have berries. I don’t buy honey because I don’t want to participate in the industry. We need to protect the bees.

          1. #Bab Sugar, we use once a year, when my wife bake some muffins for colleges (all omnivores :-( ) but in the last time even my wife use date sugar for this. Thanks Odin and Freya we don’t need some for our oatflake in the morning – but in the evening the sweet tooth calling us often – then is time for tried mangos or from time to time a piece of chocolate (not more then 1 every 2 month)… I think, if some one eats a little sweets from time to time it don’t kill him but makes him a bit more satisfied and happy. Beside, the hint from Shaylen is also a good one – Maple Sirup – „lecker“…

    4. Skeptic, why on earth would you do that? Honey offers no special benefit and is just an empty calorie sweetener.

      At least maple syrup has some nutrition and isn’t taken from animals who are actually tormented for it—see Bite Size Vegan’s video on “Is Honey Vegan?”

      But date sugar and molasses are the healthiest added sweeteners with impressive nutrition and antioxidant content.

    5. Dr.Greger answers your question in great detail in this video:https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-healthiest-sweetener/
      He further discusses sugar and its harmful effects (which DOES include honey) in theses videos:
      https://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-sugar-lead-to-weight-gain/
      https://nutritionfacts.org/video/sugar-industry-attempts-to-manipulate-the-science/
      https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-much-added-sugar-is-too-much/
      https://nutritionfacts.org/video/are-sugary-foods-addictive/
      Considering that you are really taking in an excessive amount of honey that last video might be esp eye-opening for you. Please check it out.

  9. I must confess all this industry influence over food guidelines depresses me. Whatever happened to the good ‘ol Truth! It’s why I am strongly of the opinion Industry Bodies have no place in the setting of nutritional guidelines. In saying that I simply do not understand all the sugar hate in the world. I’m very active – ride my bike 1-2 hours per day, 10,000+ steps per day and do full body gym workouts 4-5 times per week. I eat tonnes of carbs (400-800 grams per day) but some days I simply cannot meet my calorie requirements. On those days I will just make “sugar water” whereby I’ll dump 100 grams raw sugar into water and drink it. Sugar isn’t the issue. This whole debate about “refined sugars” seems an enormous red herring. Surely the real issue is the insane amount of fat people eat?

    1. I thought that the link between ‘sugary’ drinks; and diabetes risk, heart disease risk etc was recognised if not conclusively proved to be causal

      ‘A study that followed 40,000 men for two decades found that those who averaged one can of a sugary beverage per day had a 20% higher risk of having a heart attack or dying from a heart attack than men who rarely consumed sugary drinks. [18]

      A related study in women found a similar sugary beverage–heart disease link. The Nurses’ Health Study, which tracked the health of nearly 90,000 women over two decades, found that women who drank more than two servings of sugary beverage each day had a 40 percent higher risk of heart attacks or death from heart disease than women who rarely drank sugary beverages. [19].’
      https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-drinks/sugary-drinks/

    2. Will Taylor,

      If you look at the work Dr Lustig is doing, fructose is one of the things leading to fatty liver and the release of free fatty acids causes increased insulin resistance / metabolic syndrome and increased insulin resistance is highly linked to disease.

      He said that more normal weight people have metabolic syndrome And disease than obese people and fructose in the liver is one cause.

      It also does contribute to obesity because the brain doesn’t recognize it as a food and it adds calories without increasing leptin signaling to the brain or without decreasing ghrelin.

      Yes, saturated fats also can cause the free fatty acids problem, but so can fructose.

      1. Stress was a third mechanism he listed.

        But it is insulin resistance from the free fatty acids causing the problem and if you watch a video on how fructose is metabolized it doesn’t go through glycolysis.

        It goes directly to the liver because that is where the enzymes to break it down are.

      2. Really? You’d take anything Lustig says as true? The man is obese. I eat tonnes of fructose (mainly through fruit) – sometimes I eat 15-20 pieces of fruit per day! Plus I’ll still eat a fair amount of table sugar. Incidentally I fat non-alcoholic fatty liver. You know how I fixed it? I ate NOTHING but fruit and table sugar for 4 months.

  10. I wish to provide a different point of view on sugar and the intake amounts suggested – the Traditional Chinese Medicine view.
    TCM classifies every aspect of life, foods included, in Yin and Yang, Yin being “expansive” and Yang being “contractive”. Examples of Yang foods are salt, eggs, meats, etc. The most contractive of all being refined salt. Yin foods are vegetables, fruits and the most extreme, refined sugar, therefore soft drinks, hard alcoholic drinks and artificial sweeteners as well.
    To feel “right” or “balanced” a person needs to, again, balance intakes of Yang and Yin foods. For example why do you think a hamburger (extremely Yang) is traditionally served with a coke or milk shake (extremely Yin)?
    All of this discussion about cutting down on sugar does not make any sense to me unless we also cut down on eggs and meats.
    Last but not least – A big thank you, Dr. Greger and team, for shining light on the truth via Nutri Facts !!!!

  11. Giuseppe,

    Very valid points.

    Consider that in the WFPB diet we use a fair amount of spices that are in the Yang range for balance considering the generally yin bases of veggies, etc. The point about the sugar is the amazing amounts (71.14 gram per person per yr/US)https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=14&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjNlOjOqovoAhVxIDQIHXNLACQQFjANegQIBRAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.angelesinstitute.edu%2Fthenightingale%2Fdaily-sugar-intake&usg=AOvVaw1HkhpLGLokemk3vhn5pg2R ) Keep in mind this is an average hence the number is very much depressed from those of us not ingesting this amount….

    I’d love to see a simplified pictorial Chinese Medicine theory based WFPB balance chart. I have a number of TCM/5 element friends who would use this info in their practice. In looking on the net there is an opportunity here. I was considering the cinnamon, nutmeg, and ginger along with the spice mix found in Dr. G’s book, “How not to Diet” .

    And we appreciate your thank !

    Dr. Alan Kadish moderator for Dr. Greger http://www.Centerofhealth.com

    1. Dr. Kadish,
      will you pls illustrate me on Yang spices that the WFPB diet uses? Just about every spice I know of is Yin.
      Thank you,
      Giuseppe

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This