health

Sugar can make you dumb, scientists warn

18 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2012 AFP

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

18 Comments
Login to comment

Wait, what? I can't tell if this is a problem on JT or where JT got this story from, but the way it looks to me, the results are completely wrong.

The only thing that you should be taking from this information (as JT has presented it) is that these scientists don't understand how a control group should work. You can't make assumptions about what drinking HFCS will do to rats' brains if BOTH GROUPS ARE DRINKING IT.

If anything the results can possibly talk about the positive effects of Omega-3 and DHA, but no one should be taking conclusions from this study about the effects of HFCS seriously. There was no adequate control for comparison.

In short, this is BAD SCIENCE.

1 ( +2 / -2 )

There is no realistic expectation that Americans will moderate their high fructose intake so research is focused on foods that neutralize the damage. Whether there was a sugar free control is almost irrelevant in practical terms. Perfectly reasonable approach.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"consuming refined sugar is linked to cardiovascular disease, obesity, type-2 diabetes and even cancer. According to the American Heart Association (AHA), women should consume no more than 6 teaspoons of sugar per day and men no more than 9."

I wouldn't consume too much sugar, anyway, since sugar is linked to so many problems. My acne breakouts seems to be caused by high consumption of sugar...

Sugar is also worth avoiding. Unlike the more complex carbohydrates, sugar is digested very quickly and results in a sudden increase in blood insulin levels to process the extra sugar. The insulin processes the sugar and, ironically, often leads within a few hours to rapidly falling and low levels of blood sugar. This leads to further cravings for sugar. When combined with high-fat diets, this pattern can lead to chronic sugar imbalances, either hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) or type II diabetes(sustained high blood sugar). Even if these extremes in sugar metabolism are avoided, concentrated ingestions of sugar and fat can lead to a recurrent cycle of low blood sugar causing sugar cravings leading to further large ingestions of sweets.

Sugar is also addictive.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

There is no realistic expectation that Americans will moderate their high fructose intake so research is focused on foods that neutralize the damage. Whether there was a sugar free control is almost irrelevant in practical terms. Perfectly reasonable approach.

The problem is that they are then assuming that these problems are CAUSED by the HFCS intake, and without a sugar-free control, there's no way to support that. It could just be that the rats would have forgotten without the HFCS and that they only REMEMBERED because of the DHA, rather than the DHA stopping them from forgetting because of the HFCS. It's possible (though unlikely) that these results could be replicated 100% with the DHA and Omega-3 aspects without having any HFCS at all. Which is why it's bad science.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Looks like both groups were given the sugar while one group was given supplements to combat the effects of the sugar. Both groups were pre- and post-tested. The group with the supplements did better. Seems reasonable. The control group is both groups who were pre-tested.

But then, I've been drinking a sugar-laden drink for the past hour.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The group with the supplements did better.

Exactly. So the only reasonable assumption that we can make from this result, based on the groups that we were given, is the DHA/Omega-3 are good for your brain, possibly only when used in combination with HFCS.

There's no reasonable way to pull from this that HFCS is bad for your brain, because we have nothing to compare it to. We can make NO assumptions or inferences about the effects of HFCS because we have nothing to compare it to. Because BOTH groups had HFCS, so we have to assume that both groups got the same effects from HFCS (or possibly the same lack of effects).

Why isn't the headline 'HFCS, DHA, and Omega-3 linked to increased memory retention? That's an equally valid extrapolation from the information in this article. It would be equally reasonable to assume that HFCS had nothing to do with the mice forgetting, but that it was the HFCS which acted in tandem with the DHA and Omega that helped them remember. That's my problem here.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In short, this is BAD SCIENCE.

American scientists drink HFCS. And you see the result here, no ?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Not bad science, just a bad headline. Since most adults drink plenty of fructose, they'd test rats with and without omega-3's. The study wasn't looking into sugar/no sugar. It was looking into sugar/sugar with DHA. And it showed a conclusive difference between the two. It doesn't intend to show the effects of sugar on your brain. That seems to be a foregone conclusion.

This would be a perfect study to go along with a marketing plan to sell people more DHA pills or something. I wouldn't be surprised if it was funded by some corporation, despite being done at a university.

The information in this study has also been known to people promoting the "leptin resistance" diet. As eating too many simple carbs (not just pure sugar) can make your blood sugar/insulin relationship go haywire.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Sugar can make you dumb, scientists warn

Ah ha! That's what's wrong with me.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

so can alot of other things

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hah! So all those professors and other boffins who like sugar in their coffee are rotting their genius brains?

This is utter rubbish. There really are too many food scare stories out there... it must be silly season.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Real sugar comes from sugar cane. High-fructose corn syrup, I thought, was a mixture of fructose and glucose. The story uses "sugar," "fructose," and "High glucose corn syrup" as if they were all the same. They may all be sugars, but I didn't think they were the same. Chemistry majors, am I wrong about this?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Good thing I'm not a rat.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Is this true? Tomorrow, I'll give tons of chocolates to the girl I like!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HA HA HA!!!! no comment!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I like my fructose fermented, anything between 12 and 120 proof will do.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@Thomas Anderson

My acne breakouts seems to be caused by high consumption of sugar...

Or maybe when you are under stress (one of the true causes for acne) you tend to eat more sugar. Just because there seems to be a link between sugar and acne, it doesn't mean that one causes the other.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@ubikwit

I'd love to join you!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites