Low Carb Friends  
Netrition.com - Tools - Reviews - Faces - Recipes - Home


Go Back   Low Carb Friends > Main Lowcarb Lobby
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-03-2013, 07:09 AM   #1
Senior LCF Member
 
Gretalyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 852
Gallery: Gretalyn
Stats: maintenance
WOE: Nutritional Ketosis
Start Date: off and on since 2004, on to stay since March 2011
Has this study already been discussed?

PLOS ONE: The Relationship of Sugar to Population-Level Diabetes Prevalence: An Econometric Analysis of Repeated Cross-Sectional Data

The results of this study won't be newsworthy to anyone here, but might come as a surprise to some people that I know. The study shows a causative link between sugar intake and diabetes.

But before I go posting it on my Facebook page, I was wondering if anyone is aware of any flaws in the methodology, or if this is a well-designed study. I just hate it when people make a big deal of a study "proving" that a high-fat diet caused whatever disease, only to find out that it was a high-fat AND high-sugar diet - that sort of thing. I don't want to promote junk science. From what I can understand of this study, it looks really good. Thoughts?
__________________


Greta
Gretalyn is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old 03-03-2013, 08:11 AM   #2
Major LCF Poster!
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 2,925
Gallery: svenskamae
Stats: 235/178/135 5'3"
WOE: Nutritional Ketosis/Primal/JUDDD
Start Date: January 15, 2012
It looks like a well-designed and reasonably presented epidemiological study to me. There are limits to epidemiological studies of this type, but the authors do a good job of acknowledging those limitations.
svenskamae is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2013, 08:55 AM   #3
.
 
ravenrose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: California
Posts: 9,680
Gallery: ravenrose
Stats: lost 130 lb so far, and miles to go before I sleep
WOE: low carb controlled calorie
Start Date: June, 2009
The Eating Academy website has a detailed analysis of how this was done, what that means scientifically, etc. Very good!
ravenrose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2013, 12:35 PM   #4
Senior LCF Member
 
Gretalyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 852
Gallery: Gretalyn
Stats: maintenance
WOE: Nutritional Ketosis
Start Date: off and on since 2004, on to stay since March 2011
Great, thank you both!
Gretalyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2013, 01:06 PM   #5
Major LCF Poster!
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,605
Gallery: Mistizoom
Stats: 300/200/190 initial goal
WOE: low carb
Start Date: November 2012
This looks like a good study. I especially like that they found sugar, not obesity in and of itself, is a factor in diabetes:

Quote:
we see that sugar availability remained a significant correlate to diabetes prevalence independent of obesity and total calorie consumption. When obesity was removed from the model, the effect size of sugar was not significantly amplified (beta = 0.0081, p<0.001), suggesting that obesity does not appear to account for the major part of the impact of sugar on diabetes.

Last edited by Mistizoom; 03-03-2013 at 01:11 PM..
Mistizoom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2013, 01:15 PM   #6
Major LCF Poster!
 
avid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: treasure coast
Posts: 1,131
Gallery: avid
Stats: 180/134/131...
WOE: Lotsa veggies and LC
I really enjoy when sutdies such as this are shared.
It reaffirms my belief that this is a great site and one that I am wise
to visit daily.
avid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2013, 03:46 PM   #7
Senior LCF Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 383
Gallery: Rhubarb
Stats: 195/126/140
WOE: Atkins
Start Date: July 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by avid View Post
I really enjoy when sutdies such as this are shared.
It reaffirms my belief that this is a great site and one that I am wise
to visit daily.
Here's a short article with some good links to Taubes and others about this study. The NY Times food writer Mark Bittman wrote about it today as well. It's a big, big story.
Rhubarb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2013, 04:28 PM   #8
Fat Burning Machine Extraordinaire!
 
DiamondDeb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 74,259
Gallery: DiamondDeb
Stats: 125+ lbs lost
Thanks for sharing this. Very interesting.

I'll be interested to see how big sugar business handles this information. I suspect it will either be ignored or rationalized as a meaningless study for some made-up reason. Sugar-filled products are big business and big profits. For that reason I don't think we will see changes.

We can count ourselves lucky to have discovered a healthy lifestyle despite having the odds stacked against it.
DiamondDeb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2013, 08:22 PM   #9
Major LCF Poster!
 
avid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: treasure coast
Posts: 1,131
Gallery: avid
Stats: 180/134/131...
WOE: Lotsa veggies and LC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhubarb View Post
Here's a short article with some good links to Taubes and others about this study. The NY Times food writer Mark Bittman wrote about it today as well. It's a big, big story.

Wow!! that times article is terrifying. How glad am i to have eliminated sugar from my diet.
Or should I say "try" to eliminate sugar from my diet. It is a minor ingrediant in most processed foods.
avid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 10:42 AM   #10
Senior LCF Member
 
Gretalyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 852
Gallery: Gretalyn
Stats: maintenance
WOE: Nutritional Ketosis
Start Date: off and on since 2004, on to stay since March 2011
Thanks to everyone for the additional comments and links!
Gretalyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 11:44 AM   #11
Senior LCF Member
 
fiddlejen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: New England
Posts: 158
Gallery: fiddlejen
Stats: 296 oh no!!/287/..a whole lot less!!..
WOE: Fast-5
Start Date: IF 2013->Atkins 2/20. 3/13 aiming for Atkins Again
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/27/its-the-sugar-folks/

The next steps are obvious, logical, clear and up to the Food and Drug Administration. To fulfill its mission, the agency must respond to this information by re-evaluating the toxicity of sugar, arriving at a daily value — how much added sugar is safe? — and ideally removing fructose (the “sweet” molecule in sugar that causes the damage) from the “generally recognized as safe” list, because that’s what gives the industry license to contaminate our food supply.
Yeah, like that's gonna happen!

(Although... I'd certainly join the applause if it really does..)

Last edited by fiddlejen; 03-04-2013 at 11:46 AM.. Reason: to quote correctly
fiddlejen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:19 AM.


Copyright ©1999-2014 Friends Forums LLC. All rights reserved. - Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
LowCarbFriends® is a registered mark of Friends Forums, LLC.