Pretty obvious question.
Look back 100 years ago.
we didnt have mcdonalds and taco bell and massive doughnuts and cakes ice cream etc etc.
All of the above is riddled with far too many carbs. Carbs are sugar. There are just different types of carbs, therefore different types of sugar.
Why is it bad for you...
the pancreas is responsible for excreting insulin. Insulin is secreted from the pancreas when you consume carbs/sugars. If a person eats constant sugary/starchy/high carb products...then ...poof. Your pancreas is constantly working.
Your pancreas is not made to work overtime ...all the time. You overwork it and it will eventually give out, leading to diabetes.
Not to mention long before diabetes is made as a diagnosis, your cells that require the insulin are becoming resistent to it. The body is needing to produce more and more insulin to feed the cells, they dont get fed, they die.
Insulin resistence and diabetes go hand in hand. Basically you need to be eating complex good high quality carbs daily , instead of this massive sugary crap.
2006-10-26 03:38:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by bolo 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sugar is in a classified as a simple carbohydrate. It is high in caloric value, but has almost no other nutritional value. That is why products high in sugar are often called empty calories. Because simple sugars enter the blood stream faster, they are more likely to be converted to fat and stored in fat cells than cereals and other complex carbs.
I am diabetic so eating a lot of sugar would be very bad, even deadly for myself. Sugar will not hurt most people in small quantities. If too many calories are consumed or the balance of your diet contains too many empty calories and not enough nutrients - vitamins, minerals, etc., then the sugar can lead to weight gain and malnutrition. BTW - eating sugar is not a cause of diabetes (but obesity is).
2006-10-25 05:41:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by sloop_sailor 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'm not a dietician but I know this - Sugar has one tenth of one percent of any kind of nutrition in it. That means it's nutritional value out of 100% is .1% - and that's very very little. AND if it didn't have that .1% of nutrition - it would have to be listed as a drug with the FDA (Food and Drug Administration).
I don't do a lot of sugar - but when I do - I can feel it surging through my veins. I swear! It's pretty much like a drug.
Also - it's empty calories. If you are consuming it - the calories from it are going into your body instead of healthy calories that DO have a lot of nutritional value. So to put it simply - healthy calories are what your body needs in order to funtion properly - and sugar does not provide healthy calories - so it's bad for you!
Hope that helps!
2006-10-25 05:23:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by liddabet 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Whereas rotting teeth once seemed the most prominent health hazard from the use of sugar, first the growth in the usage of rum (a sugar-cane derivative) and then the predominance of concerns about diabetes and obesity gradually came to prominence.
In 2003, four United Nations agencies, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), commissioned a report compiled by a panel of 30 international experts. The panel stated that the total of free sugars (all monosaccharides and disaccharides added to foods by manufacturers, cooks or consumers, plus sugars naturally present in honey, syrups and fruit juices) should not account for more than 10% of the energy-intake of a healthy diet, while carbohydrates in total should represent between 55% and 75% of the energy-intake. However, the Sugar Association of the United States of America insists that other evidence indicates that a quarter of human food and drink intake can safely consist of sugar.
Argument continues as to the value of extrinsic sugar (sugar added to food) compared to that of intrinsic sugar (sugars (seldom sucrose) naturally present in food). Adding sugar to food particularly enhances taste, but has the primary drawback of boosting calories.
In the United States, a scientific/health debate has started over the causes of a steep rise in obesity in the general population — and one view posits increased carbohydrate consumption in recent decades as a major factor.
Please see the webpage for more details on Sugar.
2006-10-25 05:49:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by gangadharan nair 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
im not a dietician...
but roughly i've read on it..
pure sugar is actually "whiten" with some chemicals to look better...
choose natural sources like from sugarcane etc.
and of coz.. fattening and unhealthy... too much cause diabetes which can result in many problems.
2006-10-25 05:17:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by smelly_ducks 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
sugar is not bad for you, it depends on if you are diabetic or not, if you are and your type 1 then you are insulin dependent and you pancreas isn't making insulin to balance out your sugar levels, so therefor sugar would be bad, too much of it anyway
2006-10-25 14:05:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Read the following essay by a real MD:
http://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2006nl/sept/sugar.htm
2006-10-25 15:08:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mr. Peachy® 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hi
I have been a diabetic for 22 years and just found this website about 3months ago. This is a great website for diabetics.
http://www.diabetesforums.com/
2006-10-25 08:01:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by carpet guy 6
·
0⤊
0⤋