DOES SUGAR HURT?
To try to figure out if the sugar hurts, I'd like to do a nice job journey into the evolutionary past of human beings, to see the thing from a particular perspective: the evolution of the human body within its natural environment.
Not only this though, if sugar hurts in fact, the only serious way to understand more is to take a body of research quite large and relevant (having them available), then draw some close.
If we can also add some more elements to these researches, so much the better. A different perspective, their own personal experiences, can all be elements of help for better understand if sugar really hurts.
Not that this decrees an indisputable truth, because the reality is so complex that we can at best obtain gods valid clues to move steps in one direction rather than another.
But it is increasingly necessary for you to do your personal research on what benefits you and what hurts you, because who should take care of you out there (public bodies) they do not spend the resources necessary to prevent problems.
Rather, they are many gain in the 'solution' of the (health) problem when this manifests with therapies that intervene but they don't care. For this reason you should be informed - even by yourself, learning to read between the lines and understand who to trust and who don't trust too much.
In fact, in your assessment it is not even worth listening to all teachers who do theirs TV operations because it seems clear that some high-sounding names do not speak for the good of the citizen, but rather for support certain food companies and pharmaceuticals.
IS SUGAR HARM? AN EYE TO HUMAN GENETICS
Your organism as it is today is the fruit of a slow evolutionary process which has lasted for millions of years.
We are still evolving but, still today, all of ours genetic and metabolic structure è practically equal to that of prehistoric man hunter-gatherer.
Through a set of analysis of various data, it is possible to have a fairly complete picture of thesupply that could be called really natural for human beings.
These analysis1,2,3,4 They include:
- Tempering of tools for hunting and fishing
- Analysis of the composition of fossilized feces
- Analysis of bones (dating and composition)
- Study of tribe's eating habits indigenous
Hunter-gatherer is the term used to indicate the eating habits of prehistoric man. But in reality it would be more appropriate to invert the two terms: Binder-hunter. That is, first of all a collector, and then a small part hunter-fisherman (and insectivore).
THE COLLECTOR-HUNTER MAN
In fact, studies on indigenous people5 show that the portion of vegetarian and carnivorous diet of the man's omnivorous ancestral structure is divided into approximately80% vegetarian (tubers, roots, fruits, berries, seeds, nuts, mushrooms) and about 20% carnivorous-fishmonger.
In addition, the menu also included marginally caterpillars, worms, snails and other molluscs, snails, insects, crustaceans, rarely eggs and honey.
That ours prehistoric ancestors if they were hunters, hunting and cutting weapons attest that they can be found all over the world. But this does not mean that they only ate meat, also because hunting and fishing are extremely difficult activities (tiring and sometimes dangerous) and with little chance of success.
Imagine how difficult it could be to find, flush out, chase and then hit, hit, break down and eventually recover an animal in the wild. definitely it is easier and more convenient to collect seeds, mushrooms, roots and fruits...
It was always easier to look for mother earth products than to venture into hunting or fishing activities.
What does this mean in practice? (a clue to understand if it makes sense to say that sugar hurts)
FOOD AND NATURAL DRINKS: A GUIDE QUESTION
It simply means that to get clues about what is a food or drink healthy or harmful you can always start by asking yourself:
"This is a food - or drink - that even my prehistoric ancestors could have found and used in nature"?
This is just a "driving question"To understand the nature of the food and drinks offered to you more immediately.
If the food is industrialized, excessively processed, enriched with additives, preservatives, placed in containers with dubious effects on health, in each of these cases you know that food it is not in tune with your genetically predisposed metabolic setup.
In each of these cases a "metabolic friction" is created (disharmony) among the unnatural compounds you ingest and the ability of your metabolism to process them. With this I do not want to propose a Taliban approach and a return to food prehistory.
Instead this is a way to understand (also thanks to the principle of contrast) how different is the modern diet compared to the really natural one.
One of the best fixes you can make (while still staying within the modern community?) Is to veer towards one poor Mediterranean diet.
The real Mediterranean diet is not the one they want to sell you on TV made of white flour spaghetti. This is a cultural drift, often unfairly supported even by (pseudo) doctors and (Pseudo) nutritionists.
MEDITERRANEAN FEEDING (POOR)
THEauthentic Mediterranean diet5 original and poor is made by whole grains, lots of vegetables, fruits, legumes and olive oil as the main source of fat. A little bit of fish, only occasionally meat.
Remember therefore that the80% about the food resources of our ancestors came from the wild harvest of plant sources (tubers, roots, fruits, berries, seeds, nuts, mushrooms).
What characterizes all these food sources?
- A low glycemic index carbohydrate content
- They have a good quality fat content
- They are equipped with a high quantity of fibers
- They provide a good supply of vegetable proteins
- Also: they contain vitamins, minerals, antioxidants
- They are low in sugar
Have you noticed the part that says "low in sugar"?
Poor sugars, but carbohydrates are not absent. It is estimated that prehistoric man assumed about 100g of carbohydrates per day (including tubers, roots, fruits, berries, seeds, nuts, mushrooms).
The contribution of proteins and fats (for about 1g / kg body weight per day) as well as from vegetable sources they also came from a certain amount of meat and fish, which as indicated above could amount to approximately 20% compared to the total4.
This is a scheme of the probable feeding of man in a natural state, based on scientific data from various sources.
Sugar was virtually absent. There weren't any! (the only sugar was honey in very small quantities and almost never available).
You can't think of forcing the body to immediately adapt to the artificial food proposals that churns out the food industry every day. It won't adapt quickly enough ...
... otherwise, the result (it is before everyone's eyes) will be diseases, which have been amplified to excess since the radical change of natural diet. Tumors, diabetes, hypertension, obesity, neurodegenerative diseases.
Those who think they can take on all that is available on the market without problems, do so at the risk of their own health. Indeed as the body possesses extraordinary resilience, sooner or later it gives way to the harmful stimuli that we unload on him continuously.
So I would say that ... yes, sugar hurts.
Obviously it is usually understood how sugar is used, that is several times a day and every day.
A little sugar in the grandmother's tart Sunday will not create particular problems in an average healthy body. Among other things, in this example, the sugar used in the tart will be the smallest part of the total sugar content used in the dough of double zero flour (the problem in this example would shift to the “00” dough as well as its sugar content).
3 SUGAR PROBLEMS:
- It's everywhere
- Often you are not aware of hiring them with different foods or drinks (because it is hidden under synonyms that you don't know or worse yet you are sold "healthy" alternatives that have a worse effect on health than common sugar)
- Even in small quantities generates the activation of dependency mechanisms mediated by positive reinforcement. Do you honestly feel that you are immune from this mechanism inherent in the brains of all of us?
... I said, do you feel yourself declaring yourself immune from the call of sugar?
It's up to you to do a self-analysis on the real situation. If you can limit yourself then did you do it?
FRUCTOSE & SUGAR DRINKS
Sugar hurts especially in the form of fructose and soft drinks (sugary drinks)
You must know that i worst enemies from which to stay away, according to research7,13 I'm:
A) Il fructose: hence the need to let go of all the pseudo-healthy alternatives like the various ones syrups of agave, maple, honey (honey is an exception, so in small doses - no more than half a teaspoon indicatively per day - it can also be therapeutic, more not). With regard to fructose, particular attention must also be paid to the ice creams, which are often made with copious amounts of fructose syrup.
B) I Soft drinks (both containing sucrose and containing artificial sweeteners): why in liquid form they quickly pour unwanted sugars into the liver, where they activate mechanisms of production of fat and molecules harmful to health.
You know how much sugar contains a simple can of fanta from 330ml? 40 grams = 8 teaspoons of cooking sugar.
So if you switch to the bottle of fanta from 1,5 you have 180 grams of zuccherooooo !!!! = 36 teaspoons of sugar ?
And how long does it take to finish a bottle of fanta from 1,5 liters if you're used to using it like a teenager? in a couple of days it will be over. Repeat the hiring every two days and at the end of the month (2,7g) and year (32,4g) the pancreas and the liver they will be forced to a desperate escape (if only they could do it ...).
That's why the state of California6 has put a tax on sweetened beverage dispensers, and that's why among the peremptory and unequivocal statements of the WCRF (World Cancer Research Fund) is suggested by avoid consumption of sugary drinks7 (note: do not limit but avoid).
A big problem of the fructose (the cooking sugar called sucrose contains 50%) is that, in addition to its caloric content, it causes obesity and problems almost always associated with it, such as hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, kidney disease13,14 as it activates certain metabolic pathways that lead to these results.
It's like a molecular switch that - if it is activated too much - it leads in the wrong direction: towards the dysmetabolic syndrome9,10,11,12.
Again, if you look at fructose from one evolutionary perspective, you realize that in the natural environment, in which the human being has always lived, the fructose has its positive role.
As winter approaches, man (in nature) must protect yourself from the cold and food shortages accumulating fat. So the availability of fruit (source of fructose) from summer to autumn has always helped him to do this through a reversible mechanism of dysmetabolic syndrome *.
*reversible mechanism of dysmetabolic syndrome: is the metabolic mechanism with which some researchers interpret the adaptation to the winter climate (characterized by cold and scarce resources) of hibernating animals.
But today, with the widespread and permanent availability of sugar (which includes fructose) is as if our metabolism was continually pushed towards the dysmetabolic syndrome and therefore thefat accumulation and the chronic diseases associated with it.
It's time to see some alternative to sugar ...
3 ALTERNATIVES TO SUGAR
I won't deny you that the best solution would be to eliminate too sweet flavors, then the sweeteners, even natural. However keeping in mind this long-term goal, meanwhile the best substitutes you can use are:
- Stevia (better in powder, the tablets are virtually insoluble):
It is a completely natural sweetener. It is not without calories, but this is not a bad thing. On the contrary, they are the artificial sweeteners that deceive the body by giving it a sweet taste that has no calories, and that eventually produces a hormonal imbalance. Furthermore, it has a high sweetening power and therefore no very little is enough.
- Xylitol: it is a natural extraction sweetener (fruits and plants) that sweetens like sucrose but has the 40% less calories. The glycemic index of xylitol is half compared to sucrose. Also protects from caries dental. In the desirable passage to a diet without added sweeteners, both stevia and xylitol represent at present the best alternatives to sugar and other harmful natural or artificial sweeteners (as long as their use is still limited to the minimum). The transition to a sweetener decidedly better than all the others and that towards natural vanilla.
- Vanilla (powder): Vanilla powder is a fantastic way to sweeten because its aromatic compound XNUMX teaspoon vanilla extract stimulates the production of Serotonin8 (a neurotransmitter associated with good humor). It does not have a very high sweetening power and for this reason it is closer to a natural sweet taste that does not create the typical problems of excessively sweet sweeteners.
You've just seen how much damage sugar can do, but perhaps you already knew this, or at least suspected it. But maybe you didn't know that the sweetener alternatives considered to be wrongly healthy like agave syrup they can be worse than sugar same.
However do not worry, if you want to sweeten, from coffee to homemade cakes (always wholemeal if possible!), Now you have 3 beautiful alternatives natural available, and this time they are really healthy. Just remember do not overdo it with none, otherwise you will never 'detoxify' from the hyper-sweet taste (which you hardly find in nature).
You will see, that all changes of habit can be a bit challenging at first, but later you will be happy to have improved an important aspect of your diet (and that of your loved ones ... if you can persuade them).
Would you like to improve your diet but don't know what to cook or how to organize your meals and snacks?
Try The PAC7 Food Plan
See you soon,
PS: If you want to delve into the other reasons why sugar hurts, and above all how to detoxify yourself from this sweet poison click here and immediately download the free guide "RDS Rapid Sugar Detox - Quick Guide to detoxify from sugar in 7 days". On page 11 of this guide you will find the list of 38 synonyms under which sugar is hidden in common foods and beverages.
PPS: E you can say that you have defeated the common enemy (?) or are you still fighting? Reply writing your comment at the bottom of the article in the appropriate form.
Sources and resources:
1. From Wikipedia "Prehistory"
2. From Wikipedia "Neolithic"
3. From Wikipedia "Palaeolithic"
4. From Wikipedia "Human nutrition in the Paleolithic"
5. "The food of man" by Franco Berrino editions Franco Angeli
6. From Wikipedia "Sugar taxes in the world"
7. World Cancer Research International "Foods and drinks that promotes weight gain"
8. 'Vanillin-induced amelioration of depression-like behavior in rats by modulating monoamine neurotransmitters in the brain"By Jinyong Xua et al.
9. 'Mammalian hibernation: a naturally reversible model for insulin resistance in man?”By Martin SL.
10. 'Seasonal changes in pancreatic B-cell function in euthermic yellow-bellied marmots”By Florant GL and coll.
11. 'A causal role for uric acid in fructose-induced metabolic syndrome"By Nakagawa T. et al.
12. 'Metabolic effects of fructose and the worldwide increase in obesity”By Tappy L1 and coll.
13. 'Potential role of sugar (fructose) in the epidemic of hypertension, obesity and metabolic syndrome, diabetes, kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease"By Johnson RJ. and coll.
14. 'Fructose, but not dextrose, accelerates the progression of chronic kidney disease”By Gersch MS. and coll.
MEDICAL AND LEGAL DISCLAIMER:
The information provided by the manuelcasadei.com website is not intended to diagnose, treat and prevent any discomfort or disease. The user of this website is always responsible for his health and Manuel Casadei encourages you to follow these advice with the approval and supervision of a trusted doctor and disclaims any responsibility for actions taken following what is written in these pages.
Images: Google Images.