146 Reasons Why Sugar Is Ruining Your Health
A lifestyle related post. This is a shocking list to show 146 reasons why sugar isn’t good for the health. In case you want to know how found out all those information , they have referenced all of the sources at the bottom of the page for you to assert. Citing couple of reasons:
1. Sugar can suppress the immune system.
2. Sugar upsets the mineral relationships in the body.
3. Sugar can cause hyperactivity, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, and crankiness in children.
4. Sugar can produce a significant rise in triglycerides.
5. Sugar contributes to the reduction in defense against bacterial infection (infectious diseases).
6. Sugar causes a loss of tissue elasticity and function, the more sugar you eat the more elasticity and function you loose.
7. Sugar reduces high density lipoproteins.
8. Sugar leads to chromium deficiency.
9 Sugar leads to cancer of the ovaries.
10. Sugar can increase fasting levels of glucose.
11. Sugar causes copper deficiency.
12. Sugar interferes with absorption of calcium and magnesium.
13. Sugar can weaken eyesight.
14. Sugar raises the level of a neurotransmitters: dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine.
15. Sugar can cause hypoglycemia.
Interesting.
146 Reasons Why Sugar Is Ruining Your Health – [Nancy Appleton]
Tags:
Get your own Avatars at 
Loading ...
Comments
Joe Grossberg says on October 5th, 2005 at 2:36 am
Oh please … “sugar can lead to prostrate [sic] cancer”? And with no attribution?
I agree that too much sugar is bad for you, but that list is practically pseudoscience.
Also, note that she’s not an MD, she’s a PhD (in “Health Services”, from Walden University).
You might want to be more skeptical.
Russell says on October 5th, 2005 at 2:43 am
3. Sugar can cause hyperactivity, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, and crankiness in children.
I must be a middle aged child.
Holly says on October 5th, 2005 at 5:21 am
Though not stated, I assume that she means “refined cane sugar” or “table sugar” when she says “sugar.” The word “sugar” is rather vague, all carbohydrates are broken down into simple sugars during the digestion process.
I’m no sugar apologist, but this is a pretty unscientific article. Many of those individual items are repeats (4 and 10, 1 and 5), and the items are presented as absolutes with no discussion about dosage or the severity of the symptom. If actual excerpts of the articles referenced were included, or if more of the references were peer-reviewed journals instead of published books, then I’d be more inclined to want to listen to what the good doctor has to say.
Nicholas says on October 5th, 2005 at 6:13 am
Agree with Holly. Most of this is junk science. Or skewed statistical evidence. I say, do the research yourself, and you will discover the truth.
Joe Grossberg says on October 5th, 2005 at 12:25 pm
So, um, why was my comment not approved, but #2 and #3 were?
Jeff says on October 5th, 2005 at 6:47 pm
If this is Junk Science, please refer me to an article which shows the true effects of sugar.
Jeff says on October 5th, 2005 at 6:54 pm
For those who think that this list is junk science, don’ t the references show otherwise?
Joe Grossberg says on October 6th, 2005 at 12:57 am
Jeff:
The actual report about the prostate cancer risk (a summary can be read at http://www.nature.com/bjc/jour.....0396a.html ), says:
“When the highest quartile of intake was compared with the lowest, positive findings were obtained for … desserts. On the other hand, vegetables and fruits (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.3-0.9) … were associated with reduced risks of prostate cancer.”
Fruit has tons of sugar, as any low-carb dieter can tell you. Desserts have far less fiber, far more fat (e.g. cake, ice cream) and sucrose instead of fructose.
At best, she’s selectively reading the results; at worst, she’s intentionally distorting them to sell her books like “Lick the Sugar Habit”.