Smoke signals: Sugar industry needs to embrace moderation (like the rest of us)<\/h1>\n5 comments<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.foodnavigator.com\/var\/plain_site\/storage\/images\/users\/editorial\/caroline-scott-thomas\/1290859-6-eng-GB\/Caroline-SCOTT-THOMAS_dnm_author_pict.jpg\" "\\"\\"")
<\/div>\nBy\u00a0Caroline Scott-Thomas+<\/a><\/p>\n11-Feb-2014<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.foodnavigator.com\/var\/plain_site\/storage\/images\/publications\/food-beverage-nutrition\/foodnavigator.com\/market-trends\/smoke-signals-sugar-industry-needs-to-embrace-moderation-like-the-rest-of-us\/8766475-1-eng-GB\/Smoke-signals-Sugar-industry-needs-to-embrace-moderation-like-the-rest-of-us_strict_xxl.jpg\" "\\"\\"")
<\/div>\n\nRelated tags:\u00a0Sugar<\/a><\/p>\nRelated topics:\u00a0Sugar, salt and fat reduction<\/a>,\u00a0Sugar and health<\/a>,\u00a0Market Trends<\/a>,\u00a0Carbohydrates and fibres (sugar, starches)<\/a>,\u00a0Chocolate and confectionery ingredients<\/a>,\u00a0Sweeteners (intense, bulk, polyols)<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\nSugar is not like tobacco. So why does the sugar industry keep borrowing tobacco industry terms?<\/p>\n
\n\nRELATED NEWS:<\/span><\/h4>\n\u2018Misleading\u2019 to single out sugar as a lead cause of obesity, says AB Sugar<\/a><\/h5>\nPomegranate juice sugar shock: UK adults understate levels by 500%+<\/a><\/h5>\nSugar consumption linked to heart disease death risk<\/a><\/h5>\nWHO urges regulation to cut cancers linked to alcohol and obesity<\/a><\/h5>\n‘No reason’ to replace fructose with glucose in commercial foods, finds study<\/a><\/h5>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\nMost of us could cut back on the sweet stuff. The\u00a0World Health Organization (WHO) recommends less than 10% of our calories should come from added sugars, but few of us manage that.<\/p>\n
According to FAO figures,\u00a0average\u00a0global\u00a0added sugar consumption is about 24 kg a year \u2013 equivalent to about 260 calories a day \u2013 but in the EU, the figure is closer to 32 kg a year, or an average of nearly 350 calories a day. (And Americans eat nearly half that again in the form of high fructose corn syrup.)<\/p>\n
But does sugar warrant the bad press it\u2019s had in recent months? I think not, but industry\u00a0is not doing itself any favours with its response to genuine concerns about the health issues that come with too much sugar.<\/p>\n
Even the most vociferous sugar critic (I\u2019m looking at you,\u00a0Robert Lustig<\/a>\u00a0) doesn\u2019t suggest that the odd spoonful of sugar is going to kill you. The problem is over-consumption \u2013 a big one, considering that most of us are guilty of it. What\u2019s more, looking at average consumption is only helpful to a point; there are some consumers who eat and drink far, far more sugar than could be construed as healthy.<\/p>\nTobacco, on the other hand, has\u00a0no known \u2018safe\u2019 consumption level<\/a>\u00a0.<\/p>\n\n\n\nEVENT PROGRAMME<\/h3>\nFood Vision 2014, 31 Mar- 2 Apr, Cannes, France<\/a><\/h4>\nJoin us as leading innovators and senior business executives discover and debate the sources of sustainable growth and profitability in today\u2019s global food and drink markets. To find out more…<\/a>\u00a0Click here<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\nCringeworthy, knee-jerk denial?<\/b><\/p>\n
There has been a flurry of studies linking sugar with poor health outcomes \u2013 and every one of them is clear about the problem being large amounts of dietary sugar, rather than any sugar at all. But that\u2019s not what you\u2019d think from reading reactions from industry \u2013 and, to be fair, some pretty\u00a0hysterical headlines<\/a>\u00a0from the media.<\/p>\nThe industry needs to accept that there is a mounting pile of evidence suggesting that excessive sugar intake is worse for the body than we ever suspected. In particular, excessive consumption has been linked to\u00a0heart disease<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0cancers<\/a>\u00a0, in some very large observational studies. Sugar users have been quick to point out that these are\u00a0observational<\/i>\u00a0studies, which can prove association but not cause and effect.<\/p>\n\u201cImportantly, demonstrating association is not the same as establishing causation,\u201d<\/i>\u00a0said the American Beverage Association, after a major US review linked high sugar intakes with significantly increased risk of death from heart disease. This kind of knee-jerk protectionist reaction makes me cringe.<\/p>\n
Where are the double-blind randomised controlled trials? Well, it\u2019s simply not possible to design such a study \u2013 at least not without major ethical concerns. Who\u2019s volunteering their children, from birth, for a strictly controlled diet alongside an intravenous solution that may or may not be sugar syrup for the next 50 years, so we can see once and for all which group has the highest rate of heart disease?<\/p>\n
And doesn\u2019t this sound familiar? That\u2019s right, the tobacco industry rolled out the same message.<\/p>\n
As recently as 2003, the British tobacco firm Imperial\u00a0used as a defence<\/a>\u00a0in court documents:\u201cCigarette smoking has not been scientifically established as a cause of lung cancer. The cause or causes of lung cancer are unknown.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\nThe UK government had accepted the cancer-tobacco link in 1957. Thankfully, no one had to volunteer their kids to \u2018prove\u2019 that link in a controlled trial.<\/p>\n
The middle road<\/b><\/p>\n
Of course, there are exceptions to blundering PR messages in the sugar sector. It was refreshing to hear\u00a0AB Sugar\u2019s head of food science<\/a>\u00a0saying earlier this week that the company\u201cwould not advocate a high sugar diet\u201d<\/i>. Yes, sugar can have a role to play in making foods and drinks tasty, and it should be okay to say that; we don\u2019t have to live on kale and a\u00e7a\u00ef berries.<\/p>\nI have a message for sugar makers and sugar users: It may not be unhealthy per se, but you need to accept that sugar is not healthy either. Accept that intakes need to continue on a downward trajectory for a while yet. Diversify your portfolio to include zero-calorie sweeteners. Keep cutting sugar.<\/p>\n
Then reap the rewards of a healthier population \u2013 that can keep eating moderate amounts of sugar for longer \u2013 and avoid the PR nightmare of constantly trying to defend a nutritionally questionable product.<\/p>\n
Everyone loves sugar. Unlike the tobacco industry, you\u2019ve got nothing to worry about.<\/p>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\nCopyright<\/strong>\u00a0– Unless otherwise stated all contents of this web site are \u00a9 2014 – William Reed Business Media SAS – All Rights Reserved – Full details for the use of materials on this site can be found in the\u00a0Terms & Conditions<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\nGet more articles like this in your mailbox:<\/p>\n
<\/div>\nBy\u00a0Caroline Scott-Thomas+<\/a><\/p>\n 11-Feb-2014<\/p>\n<\/div>\n Related tags:\u00a0Sugar<\/a><\/p>\n Related topics:\u00a0Sugar, salt and fat reduction<\/a>,\u00a0Sugar and health<\/a>,\u00a0Market Trends<\/a>,\u00a0Carbohydrates and fibres (sugar, starches)<\/a>,\u00a0Chocolate and confectionery ingredients<\/a>,\u00a0Sweeteners (intense, bulk, polyols)<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Sugar is not like tobacco. So why does the sugar industry keep borrowing tobacco industry terms?<\/p>\n Most of us could cut back on the sweet stuff. The\u00a0World Health Organization (WHO) recommends less than 10% of our calories should come from added sugars, but few of us manage that.<\/p>\n According to FAO figures,\u00a0average\u00a0global\u00a0added sugar consumption is about 24 kg a year \u2013 equivalent to about 260 calories a day \u2013 but in the EU, the figure is closer to 32 kg a year, or an average of nearly 350 calories a day. (And Americans eat nearly half that again in the form of high fructose corn syrup.)<\/p>\n But does sugar warrant the bad press it\u2019s had in recent months? I think not, but industry\u00a0is not doing itself any favours with its response to genuine concerns about the health issues that come with too much sugar.<\/p>\n Even the most vociferous sugar critic (I\u2019m looking at you,\u00a0Robert Lustig<\/a>\u00a0) doesn\u2019t suggest that the odd spoonful of sugar is going to kill you. The problem is over-consumption \u2013 a big one, considering that most of us are guilty of it. What\u2019s more, looking at average consumption is only helpful to a point; there are some consumers who eat and drink far, far more sugar than could be construed as healthy.<\/p>\n Tobacco, on the other hand, has\u00a0no known \u2018safe\u2019 consumption level<\/a>\u00a0.<\/p>\n Join us as leading innovators and senior business executives discover and debate the sources of sustainable growth and profitability in today\u2019s global food and drink markets. To find out more…<\/a>\u00a0Click here<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Cringeworthy, knee-jerk denial?<\/b><\/p>\n There has been a flurry of studies linking sugar with poor health outcomes \u2013 and every one of them is clear about the problem being large amounts of dietary sugar, rather than any sugar at all. But that\u2019s not what you\u2019d think from reading reactions from industry \u2013 and, to be fair, some pretty\u00a0hysterical headlines<\/a>\u00a0from the media.<\/p>\n The industry needs to accept that there is a mounting pile of evidence suggesting that excessive sugar intake is worse for the body than we ever suspected. In particular, excessive consumption has been linked to\u00a0heart disease<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0cancers<\/a>\u00a0, in some very large observational studies. Sugar users have been quick to point out that these are\u00a0observational<\/i>\u00a0studies, which can prove association but not cause and effect.<\/p>\n \u201cImportantly, demonstrating association is not the same as establishing causation,\u201d<\/i>\u00a0said the American Beverage Association, after a major US review linked high sugar intakes with significantly increased risk of death from heart disease. This kind of knee-jerk protectionist reaction makes me cringe.<\/p>\n Where are the double-blind randomised controlled trials? Well, it\u2019s simply not possible to design such a study \u2013 at least not without major ethical concerns. Who\u2019s volunteering their children, from birth, for a strictly controlled diet alongside an intravenous solution that may or may not be sugar syrup for the next 50 years, so we can see once and for all which group has the highest rate of heart disease?<\/p>\n And doesn\u2019t this sound familiar? That\u2019s right, the tobacco industry rolled out the same message.<\/p>\n As recently as 2003, the British tobacco firm Imperial\u00a0used as a defence<\/a>\u00a0in court documents:\u201cCigarette smoking has not been scientifically established as a cause of lung cancer. The cause or causes of lung cancer are unknown.\u201d<\/i><\/p>\n The UK government had accepted the cancer-tobacco link in 1957. Thankfully, no one had to volunteer their kids to \u2018prove\u2019 that link in a controlled trial.<\/p>\n The middle road<\/b><\/p>\n Of course, there are exceptions to blundering PR messages in the sugar sector. It was refreshing to hear\u00a0AB Sugar\u2019s head of food science<\/a>\u00a0saying earlier this week that the company\u201cwould not advocate a high sugar diet\u201d<\/i>. Yes, sugar can have a role to play in making foods and drinks tasty, and it should be okay to say that; we don\u2019t have to live on kale and a\u00e7a\u00ef berries.<\/p>\n I have a message for sugar makers and sugar users: It may not be unhealthy per se, but you need to accept that sugar is not healthy either. Accept that intakes need to continue on a downward trajectory for a while yet. Diversify your portfolio to include zero-calorie sweeteners. Keep cutting sugar.<\/p>\n Then reap the rewards of a healthier population \u2013 that can keep eating moderate amounts of sugar for longer \u2013 and avoid the PR nightmare of constantly trying to defend a nutritionally questionable product.<\/p>\n Everyone loves sugar. Unlike the tobacco industry, you\u2019ve got nothing to worry about.<\/p>\n Copyright<\/strong>\u00a0– Unless otherwise stated all contents of this web site are \u00a9 2014 – William Reed Business Media SAS – All Rights Reserved – Full details for the use of materials on this site can be found in the\u00a0Terms & Conditions<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Get more articles like this in your mailbox:<\/p>\n<\/div>\nRELATED NEWS:<\/span><\/h4>\n
\u2018Misleading\u2019 to single out sugar as a lead cause of obesity, says AB Sugar<\/a><\/h5>\n
Pomegranate juice sugar shock: UK adults understate levels by 500%+<\/a><\/h5>\n
Sugar consumption linked to heart disease death risk<\/a><\/h5>\n
WHO urges regulation to cut cancers linked to alcohol and obesity<\/a><\/h5>\n
‘No reason’ to replace fructose with glucose in commercial foods, finds study<\/a><\/h5>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
EVENT PROGRAMME<\/h3>\n
Food Vision 2014, 31 Mar- 2 Apr, Cannes, France<\/a><\/h4>\n