Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / General / August 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Soda a Day Boosts Weight Gain, Risk of Diabetes

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
tcomeau - 25 Aug 2004 04:06 GMT
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29434-2004Aug24.html

A Regular Soda a Day Boosts Weight Gain
Non-Diet Drinks Also Increase Risk of Diabetes, Study Shows

By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 25, 2004; Page A01

Women who drink non-diet soda or fruit punch every day gain weight
quickly and face a sharply elevated risk of diabetes, according to a
major study released yesterday.

The study of more than 50,000 U.S. nurses found that those who drank
just one serving of soda or fruit punch a day tended to gain much more
weight than those who drank less than one a month, and had more than
an 80 percent increased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes, the most
common form of the disease. The risk pertained to drinks sweetened
with either sugar or high-fructose corn syrup.

_____Obesity_____

• Government Releases Plan Focusing on Obesity (Reuters, Aug 24,
2004)
• Obesity Raises Risk for 9 Cancer Types (Associated Press, Aug
24, 2004)
• Shrinking the Universe (The Washington Post, Aug 24, 2004)
• Number of Americans Who Have High Blood Pressure Up Sharply
(The Washington Post, Aug 24, 2004)
• Obesity Raises Risk for 9 Cancer Types (Associated Press, Aug
23, 2004)
• More Stories



   
 
 _____Health Calculators_____

How do your meals add up? Calculate calories at fast-food restaurants
and check your body fat.
• Calorie Counter
• Body Mass Index
 
 


_____Sally Squires_____

• Past Lean Plate Club Columns
• Lean Plate Club Discussion Transcripts



_____Diabetes_____

• Risk Syndrome Found In Overweight Teens (The Washington Post,
Aug 12, 2003)
• FDA Clarifies Guidelines for Approval of Drugs, Devices (The
Washington Post, Jan 31, 2003)
• A Self-Test for Diabetics (The Washington Post, Jan 14, 2003)
• Regimen Offers Hope for Some Diabetics (The Washington Post,
Apr 30, 2002)
• For Tribes, Traditions May Be Key to a Healthier Future (The
Washington Post, Apr 9, 2002)
• Diabetes News




Although previous studies have linked such drinks to obesity and
diabetes, the association has been the subject of intense debate as
health activists have fought to ban soda vending machines from schools
and the sugar industry has lobbied against dietary guidelines that
discourage sugar consumption by children and adults. The new study is
by far the largest and best-designed and one of the first to examine
the issue in adults.

"The message is: Anyone who cares about their health or the health of
their family would not consume these beverages," said Walter C.
Willett of the Harvard School of Public Health, who helped conduct the
study. "Parents who care about their children's health should not keep
them at home."

Neither diet soda nor unsweetened fruit juices appear to carry the
same risks, the researchers found. Although the study involved only
women, the researchers believed that the risks also hold for men.

Other experts agreed, saying the study represented a milestone in the
debate over soft drink consumption, which has skyrocketed in the past
20 years with the rising obesity epidemic.

"While it shouldn't be surprising to anyone that soda causes weight
gain because it's high in calories, these findings are very
significant. I think they are really a wake-up call to the consumer of
soft drink beverages, to the government, to the community, to primary
care providers," said Caroline M. Apovian of the Boston University
School of Medicine, who wrote an editorial accompanying the findings
in today's Journal of the American Medical Association.

The sugar and beverage industries said the study was fundamentally
flawed.

"The conclusions from this study are scientifically unsound, and they
are at odds with all that's known in the scientific community," said
Richard Adamson, vice president for scientific and technical affairs
at the American Beverage Association. "These allegations are
inflammatory."

Among the study's many problems, Adamson said, the researchers failed
to take into consideration a host of other variables that could
account for the apparent risk. Women who drink a lot of soda may
simply have generally unhealthy lifestyles, he said.

"If they would have adjusted for all the confounding factors, they
would not have found any risk at all," he said.

Any increased risk for diabetes in the study could be attributed to
the weight the women gained, not their sugar intake, said Charles
Baker, vice president for scientific affairs for the Sugar
Association.

"It's not about sugar. It's about calorie imbalance," Baker said.

But other nutrition experts hailed the research.

"This is a strong study, which joins a number of others in showing
that soft drink consumption is related to poor diet and obesity, yet
the soft drink industry says the opposite," said Kelly Brownell, who
is director of the Yale University Center for Eating and Weight
Disorders. "They lose credibility by the day. Reducing soft drink
consumption may be a powerful means of addressing the obesity crisis."

In the study, Willett and his colleagues analyzed data collected from
Nurses' Health Study II, an ongoing project involving 91,249 women
designed to examine an abundance of health issues by regularly
questioning the women in depth over many years.

Data collected from 51,603 women over an average of four years found
that the women who gained the most weight were those who increased
their consumption of non-diet drinks from one or fewer per week to one
or more per day, the researchers found. Such women gained an average
of 10.3 pounds, compared with an average of slightly less than three
pounds for those who consumed one drink or less per week.

In addition, those who had one or more drinks containing sugar or corn
syrup per day were 83 percent more likely to develop Type 2 diabetes
than those who drank less than one such drink per month. Diabetes, a
chronic blood sugar disorder that puts victims at risk for a variety
of serious complications, is becoming increasingly common in the
United States.

"Putting down all that sugar is not a healthy thing to do," Willett
said in a telephone interview. "That's the bottom line."

He said the findings held true even after the researchers adjusted for
a variety of factors that could explain the findings, such as how much
exercise the women were getting and how well they ate overall.

The findings suggest that there is something especially unhealthy
about calories consumed in liquid form, Apovian said.

"It seems that when you drink your calories as opposed to eating them,
your body may not sense that you've just taken in those calories and
your appetite doesn't seem to compensate," Apovian said. "The appetite
circuit might not be programmed to register liquid calories."

*****

This is what I've been saying in sci.med.nutrition for going on four
years now.

Apologies and retractions will now be graciously accepted.

TC
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 25 Aug 2004 14:08 GMT
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29434-2004Aug24.html
>
> A Regular Soda a Day Boosts Weight Gain
> Non-Diet Drinks Also Increase Risk of Diabetes, Study Shows

That's why these drinks are weighed per the 2PD Approach:

http:/www.heartmdphd.com/wtloss.asp

Servant to the humblest person in the universe,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

**
Who is the humblest person in the universe?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048

What is all this about?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48

Is this spam?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867
tcomeau - 25 Aug 2004 20:10 GMT
The hell with you and your voodoo 2PD crap. This is a science
newsgroup not some stupid a.s spammer voodoo diet forum. Your god will
wave to you as you rot in a board certified hell. Quack.

TC

> > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29434-2004Aug24.html
> >
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> Is this spam?
> http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 25 Aug 2004 20:13 GMT
> The hell with you and your voodoo 2PD crap.

Sorry the truth bothers you.

> This is a science
> newsgroup not some stupid a.s spammer voodoo diet forum.

You started this thread.  Sorry you regret it.

> Your god will
> wave to you as you rot in a board certified hell. Quack.

Ouch. You may have at the other cheek.

> TC

You will be in my prayers, dear neighbor whom I love.

Servant to the humblest person in the universe,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

**
Who is the humblest person in the universe?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048

What is all this about?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48

Is this spam?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867
tcomeau - 27 Aug 2004 15:16 GMT
> > The hell with you and your voodoo 2PD crap.
>
> Sorry the truth bothers you.

What truth?

> > This is a science
> > newsgroup not some stupid a.s spammer voodoo diet forum.
>
> You started this thread.  Sorry you regret it.

I did not invite you to take part. In fact I would prefer that you
keep your nonsense to yourself. Go post where people are stupid enough
to buy into your board certified garbage.

> > Your god will
> > wave to you as you rot in a board certified hell. Quack.
>
> Ouch. You may have at the other cheek.

f.ck you.

> > TC
>
> You will be in my prayers, dear neighbor whom I love.

f.ck you.....

> a.shole to the humblest person in the universe,
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
> Board-Certified Quack

...and the horse you rode in on.

TC
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 27 Aug 2004 20:16 GMT
> > > The hell with you and your voodoo 2PD crap.
> >
> > Sorry the truth bothers you.
>
> What truth?

Sorry you are unable to discern it.

> > > This is a science
> > > newsgroup not some stupid a.s spammer voodoo diet forum.
> >
> > You started this thread.  Sorry you regret it.
>
> I did not invite you to take part.

Welcome to Usenet.

> In fact I would prefer that you
> keep your nonsense to yourself.

Sorry my being openly Christian bothers you.

> Go post where people are stupid enough
> to buy into your board certified garbage.

Ouch.  You may have at the other cheek.

> > > Your god will
> > > wave to you as you rot in a board certified hell. Quack.
> >
> > Ouch. You may have at the other cheek.
> >
> <hiss hiss>

Sorry my turning the other cheek bothers you.

> > > TC
> >
> > You will be in my prayers, dear neighbor whom I love.
>
> <hiss hiss.....>

Sorry my praying for you bothers you.

> > a.shole to the humblest person in the universe,
> >
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> TC

You remain in my prayers, dear neighbor whom I love.

Servant to the humblest person in the universe,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
http://www.heartmdphd.com/

**
Who is the humblest person in the universe?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?L26062048

What is all this about?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?R20632B48

Is this spam?
http://makeashorterlink.com/?N69721867
Harvey Carolles - 28 Aug 2004 06:23 GMT
Are diet sodas (eg, diet coke) bad for your teeth? Bad for weight loss? Bad
for your liver? Circulatory system? Etc?

For years I've looked for an answer about teeth, but never found a
definitive answer.

Most sodas have phosphoric acid to acidify the taste (bit a bite which
complements the sweetness
from sugar, aspartame or whatever). I'd expect that is a threat to the
teeth, but not sure. Without the sugar, _maybe_ bacterial attack is much
less, but overall damage?

Any intelligent commentary or sources, appreciated.

Regards, Harv.
tcomeau - 28 Aug 2004 16:55 GMT
> Are diet sodas (eg, diet coke) bad for your teeth? Bad for weight loss? Bad
> for your liver? Circulatory system? Etc?
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Regards, Harv.

Those populations that do not eat any refined carbs have little or no
dental problems as we do. Do a google search on Weston Price. Real
interesting stuff.

TC
Floomis - 27 Aug 2004 19:02 GMT
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29434-2004Aug24.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> quickly and face a sharply elevated risk of diabetes, according to a
> major study released yesterday.

But the women who drank MORE than one can per DAY gained LESS weight
than the ones who drank LESS than one can per WEEK.  Report rather
glosses over that, as do the media.

> The study of more than 50,000 U.S. nurses found that those who drank
> just one serving of soda or fruit punch a day tended to gain much more
> weight than those who drank less than one a month, and had more than
> an 80 percent increased risk of developing Type 2 diabetes, the most
> common form of the disease. The risk pertained to drinks sweetened
> with either sugar or high-fructose corn syrup.

Actually they said the risk came even from DIET soft-drinks which had
no sugar (kind of goes against their main "point", if you could say
the report had one).  They said that with more than just ONE DIET
soft-drink you get an increase of 21%!

Most significantly, the numbers clearly indicate the soda isn't the
problem, the fat is.  Correcting (statistically adjusting) for two
factors : daily caloric-intake and weight, the "increase" falls to 32%
(no longer a correlation, now is it, since the non-sugared drinks are
21%?).  This strongly points to the person being sedentary as the main
risk factor here.

Just last April, the co-author of this study published a paper saying
that Sugar intake was NOT correlated with any type 2 diabetes risk.

Why didn't they follow up with the MOST logical link as a clincher --
if you want to "blame" soft drinks and need a smoking gun, find out
how active the women are -- make "calories burned by exercise per day"
or something along those lines an explicitly empirical column in the
data.

If you are fat, then you are at risk.  If you are fat AND sedentary,
then you are effectively a paying subscriber to D2 - the sequel.
Bill - 27 Aug 2004 21:01 GMT
> > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29434-2004Aug24.html
> >
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> the report had one).  They said that with more than just ONE DIET
> soft-drink you get an increase of 21%!

Could you provide a reference for this. Thanks.

Bill

> Most significantly, the numbers clearly indicate the soda isn't the
> problem, the fat is.  Correcting (statistically adjusting) for two
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> If you are fat, then you are at risk.  If you are fat AND sedentary,
> then you are effectively a paying subscriber to D2 - the sequel.
severesocialanxiety - 29 Aug 2004 07:01 GMT
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29434-2004Aug24.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 171 lines]
>
> TC

This is true but soda tastes darn good. There are some good tasting
diet drinks or drink ice water. ice water tastes pretty good.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.