7
   

Candy: the new health food?

 
 
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 09:47 am
What sort of mad wizardry is this?

Quote:
(CBS) Indulging a sweet tooth might not be anyone's idea of a good weight-loss strategy. But in jaw-dropping new research, scientists say they've found something even more likely to be associated with unwanted weight gain in children and adolescents than eating candy:

Not eating candy.

For the study, published in Food & Nutrition Research, researchers at Louisiana State University tracked the health of more than 11,000 youngsters between the ages of two and 18 from 1999 to 2004. They found that children who ate sweets were 22 percent less likely to be overweight or obese than kids who shunned sweets. Adolescents? Those who ate candy were 26 percent less likely to be overweight or obese than their non-candy-eating counterparts.

And that wasn't the only surprising finding. Researchers also found that the blood of candy-eating kids had lower levels of C-reactive protein. That's a marker of inflammation in the body and a risk factor for cardiovascular disease and other chronic illnesses.

So all this means kids at risk for weight gain should stock up on Snickers? Not so fast, doctors say.

"The results of this study should not be construed as a hall-pass to overindulge," lead researcher Dr. Carol O'Neil said in a written statement. "Candy should not replace nutrient-dense foods in the diet; it is a special treat and should be enjoyed in moderation."

But for those who have tried to stymie a sweet tooth, the news isn't just reassuring.

It's sweet.


I give up. There is no nutrition information that makes the least bit of sense anymore. You would think that in the second decade of the 21st century that we would have some kind of idea of how our bodies work.

What do you make of this?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 7 • Views: 2,927 • Replies: 25

 
ehBeth
 
  4  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 09:52 am
@boomerang,
hamburger's grandparents' rule stands.

Everything in moderation.
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 10:20 am
@ehBeth,
Wise people, hamburger's grandparents.
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 10:27 am
@boomerang,
I found the study: http://www.foodandnutritionresearch.net/index.php/fnr/article/view/5794/8677
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  2  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 10:31 am
@boomerang,
Quote:
I give up. There is no nutrition information that makes the least bit of sense anymore. You would think that in the second decade of the 21st century that we would have some kind of idea of how our bodies work.

What do you make of this?

Sorry Boomerang but ONCE AGAIN more sense is actually made in the supplied article.

Once again, people forget about the magic word...:

MODERATION.

Candy (at least candy that's not high in fat) can be a better alternative taken in limited moderation than say falling to a crave for a large French fries or potato chips, etc....

Literally and figuratively keep in mind the following scientifically proven fact:
Quote:
Glucose is the form of sugar that travels in your bloodstream to fuel the mitochondrial furnaces responsible for your brain power. Glucose is the only fuel normally used by brain cells. Because neurons cannot store glucose, they depend on the bloodstream to deliver a constant supply of this precious fuel.


http://www.fi.edu/learn/brain/carbs.html
chai2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 11:25 am
Personally I think the way our bodies work is no mystery at all.

The problem is we (a general we) don't give our bodies what it need to do its job, then let it do it.

Instead we have a barrel full of experts weighing, measuring, experimenting, testing, investigating, telling us how many grams out of what box or plastic container to eat out of.

I haven't seen any snickers bars bushes or doritos trees growing anywhere. I guess that's all I need to know.

boomerang
 
  2  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 12:09 pm
@chai2,
There aren't any tofu bushes either.

Sugar and chocolate are natural foods. Maybe they too are things are bodies need.
boomerang
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 12:12 pm
@tsarstepan,
I don't think people forget moderation, I think they ignore it.

I agree that moderation is really key to anything.
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 12:16 pm
@boomerang,
One thing I read recently (where?? wish I could remember) that made a lot of sense is that while bodies do need a certain amount of sugar, our fondness for sugar probably comes at least in part from the fact that sweetness is usually a marker of ripeness (in fruits and such). And ripeness = good.

Interesting study, I completely agree with ehBeth's ancestors...

edit: one thing I'm curious about with this study is if it has to do with some of the theories re: alcohol consumption, that those who consume X in moderation are more likely to be healthy. With the main variable being the moderation, no extremes of diet or lifestyle. As in, not that candy is HEALTHY per se, but that the kind of people who eat some candy are the kind of people who tend to be healthier than the kind of people who never touch it.

edit #2: also why does the group that never touches sweets never touch them? (closely related to the above idea but a little different.) Were they kids who were already overweight and so they are now dieting? Was it self-reporting? If so, might the kids who are already overweight be more likely to SAY they had no candy, even if they did?
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 12:21 pm
@sozobe,
sozobe wrote:
Was it self-reporting?


Yeah, from the link:

Quote:
Twenty-four hour dietary recalls were used to determine intake.


Dietary recalls means, I think, that researchers asked the kids "what have you eaten in the last 24 hours?"
0 Replies
 
boomerang
 
  2  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 12:31 pm
@sozobe,
I remember seeing an experiment where they left kids alone in a room with bowls full of candy. The kids that were told not to eat the candy ate more than the kids told to eat all the candy that they wanted.

The people I know who don't eat sweets do so because of health concerns, not weight concerns but I don't know how universal that might be.
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 12:36 pm
@boomerang,
I don't know that many kids who absolutely can't eat sweets. (Thinking....) Can't think of any at all, but I can't swear to it.

I was supposedly one when I was a kid (my parents wouldn't allow me to have sweets) BUT I found all kinds of ways to find and eat candy. My own experience is definitely a big part of why I've gone the moderation route with sozlet. (Took me a while to get over that whole thing -- no-sweets-allowed and resulting high interest level in candy -- though I did.)

It seems like a standard dieting thing though -- cut out candy and soda. Maybe not?
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 12:45 pm
@sozobe,

Diet Soda Linked To Weight Gain
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 12:48 pm
@DrewDad,
Yep, not surprised.

I remembered one kid!! He's not a friend of sozlet's but goes to my friend's house often to hang out with her son, and is always searching her fridge/ pantry. He's not allowed to have sweets at home. Definitely a weight thing with him. (He's overweight now.) Not sure how he'd answer the 24-hour dietary recall thing, especially if his parents were around.
0 Replies
 
tsarstepan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 12:54 pm
@boomerang,
More then fair distinction. I'm guilty of that vice as well.
0 Replies
 
chai2
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 01:20 pm
@boomerang,
boomerang wrote:

There aren't any tofu bushes either.

Sugar and chocolate are natural foods.


You won't get any arguement there.

However, tofu is made from pressing soy milk (which is made by grinding soy beans and mixing with water) into curds...like you do with cheese.

There's sugar cane, honey, cocoa leaves and cocoa beans. All of which in its natural state is fine. You'd have to do a lot of work to get enough of any of those to do your body much harm. It's a treat.

In contrast, the chocolate in a snickers bar is made of:
Snickers ingredients are: milk chocolate (sugar, cocoa butter, chocolate, skimmed milk, lactose, milkfat, soy lecithin, artificial flavor), peanuts, corn syrup, sugar, skimmed milk, butter, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, lactose (a milk product), salt, egg whites and artificial flavor

Food wise, they're not even in the same ball park.

I don't need to read a long science article to tell me I shouldn't be putting most of the **** in my body.

If our body needs sugar and fat, we can get it without all the substances created in a test tube.
boomerang
 
  2  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 01:46 pm
@chai2,
Quote:
However, tofu is made from pressing soy milk (which is made by grinding soy beans and mixing with water) into curds...like you do with cheese.


You left out the part about the hexane......
chai2
 
  0  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 02:00 pm
@boomerang,
I don't think they were using hexane in China in the 2nd century BC

Whatever crap is being done to tofu is a modern problem.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 02:40 pm
@chai2,
Back in the Arcata, CA area, there were artisan tofu makers..


I do think the well made real chocolate bars are, besides a joy for some of us, a kind of health bit, or bite, aside from the sugar metabolized.
0 Replies
 
jcboy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Jul, 2011 03:04 pm
Growing up I was a strange kid, I didn’t like any candy or sweets and I’m still that way to this day.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Candy: the new health food?
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/11/2020 at 04:03:15