ANOTHER study concludes that just one sugary drink a day can increase your risk of developing cardiovascular, or heart, disease.
The Star Malaysia
By NANCY CLANTON
A father and daughter check the ingredients label on a fruit drink at the supermarket. drinking sugary beverages daily, including fruit drinks with added sugar, can increase a person’s risk of heart disease. — Positive Parenting
ANOTHER study concludes that just one sugary drink a day can increase your risk of developing cardiovascular, or heart, disease.
Last year, researchers in France found that even one small glass of soft drink or sugary juice can increase your chances of getting cancer or having heart problems.
Now, in a study recently published in the Journal of the American Heart Association, California researchers in the United States have found that one serving daily of a sugary soft drink is associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease.
Sugar-sweetened beverages were defined as “caloric soft drinks, sweetened bottled waters or teas, and fruit drinks.”
For their study, the scientists questioned 106.178 women free from cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus in the California Teachers Study, a cohort of female teachers and administrators who have been followed since 1995.
The women were questioned for 20 years to determine beverage consumption and whether they had been diagnosed with heart disease, stroke or diabetes.
During those two decades, many of the women began showing signs of those conditions.
The study found that women who consumed fruit drinks with added sugar daily – “fruit drink” excluded fruit juices and included only flavoured fruity drinks with added sugar – were 42% more likely to develop cardiovascular disease, compared with those who drank no sugary beverages.
Frequent (but not daily) soft drinkers had less risk, with a 23% greater likelihood for cardiovascular disease overall.
The American Heart Association advises no added sugar for children younger than two years of age, no more than 100 calories from added sugar a day for children older than two years and most women, and no more than 150 calories from added sugar a day for most men.
That’s about six teaspoons or 24g of sugar for children older than two years and women, and nine teaspoons or 36g of sugar for men.
According to the Mayo Clinic in the US, one teaspoon of sugar (which equals about 4g) has about 16 calories.
A 12oz (355ml) can of regular soft drink has about 160 calories – about 10 teaspoons or 40g of sugar.
“We hypothesise that sugar may increase the risk of cardiovascular diseases in several ways,” said lead author Cheryl Anderson, a professor of family and public health at the University of California, San Diego.
“It raises glucose levels and insulin concentrations in the blood, which may increase appetite and lead to obesity – a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease.”
In addition, she said, excessive sugar is associated with inflammation, insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes.
To avoid consuming too much added sugar, the American Heart Association recommends reading labels.
Many foods – not just beverages – have sugar added, so checking labels can help keep amounts in check. – The Atlanta JournalConstitution/Tribune News Service
PUBLISHED: 18:21 BST, 31 July 2018 | UPDATED: 20:19 BST, 31 July 2018
Drinking diet soda is just as bad for you as having a regular soda, a new report has claimed.
Even sugar-free drinks are raising the risk of weight gain, type 2 diabetes, dementia and stroke among US adults, the panel of doctors and researchers has warned.
They said that children are at an even greater risk of disease because consuming diet drinks at such a young age can create behaviors that follow them throughout their lives.
With obesity rates continuing to balloon in the US - and diabetes, heart disease and certain cancers following these trends - the experts say it is vital now more than ever to lay down the diet sodas to help curb the growing epidemic.
+1
Experts have warned Americans in a new advisory to stop consuming diet drink due to several studies showing a link to weight gain, and an increased risk of dementia and stroke
The group, from the American Heart Association, did note that diet drinks are often used by people who generally consume large amounts of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) as a way to wean themselves off.
'This approach may be particularly helpful for individuals who are habituated to a sweet-tasting beverage and for whom water, at least initially, is not a desirable option,' the report said.
The writers also pointed to a number of self-reporting surveys that showed an encouraging trend of Americans consuming fewer sugar-laden and diet drinks.
ccording to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, adults drank an average of 5.6 ounces of low-calorie drinks per day - the equivalent of about half a can of soda - in 2006.
The data showed that by 2014, adults were drinking just 3.8 ounces per day. For kids and teenagers, they were drinking less than an ounce per day.
KIDS ARE FALLING OUT OF LOVE WITH SODA, REVEALS CDC
American teenagers are increasingly shunning fizzy drinks, a CDC report revealed in February 2017.
Soda drinking among high school students in the US dropped by over one-third from 2007 to 2015.
Meanwhile there has been a uptick in the number of American children drinking diet soda.
Researchers say the new figures are encouraging as sugar-sweetened beverages are one of the largest contributors of added sugars to adolescents' diets.
However, they noted that the overall prevalence of Americans drinking sugary drinks, at any age, remains high and more approaches need to be put into place for the downward trend to continue.
The report, as part of the CDC's weekly Morbidity and Mortality report, took its data from the YRBS - a US survey that provides representative data on health behaviors among students in grades nine to 12.
The survey asked the high schoolers how many times that had drunk 'a can, bottle, or glass of soda or pop, such as Coke, Pepsi, or Sprite' and not counting diet drinks.
Researchers found that the number of students drinking soda daily had significantly fallen from 33.8 percent in 2007 to 20.4 percent in 2015.
Meanwhile, according to the survey, adults drank an average of 16.2 ounces of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) per day in 2000, which fell to 8.4 ounces in 2014.
The decline was even more drastic among kids, from 19 ounces per day in 2000 to 8.6 ounces in 2014.
The American Heart Association, in 2016, released its recommendation that children consume no more than six teaspoons of sugar per day.
'We want to make crystal clear it's important to maintain that [downward] trend,' said Dr Alice Lichtenstein, vice chair of the writing group and a professor of nutrition science and policy at Tufts University in Boston.
'We hear a lot about potential adverse effects of low-calorie sweeteners, but much of it is speculation. We have to go with the available evidence. The best advice we can give at this time is to ramp down intake and avoid excess consumption.'
The advisory particularly recommended that children stay away due to the lack of data on the long-term effects of these low-calorie drinks.
'One question we discussed is whether for children who are obese and who drink regular soda on a regular basis, is it OK for them to drink diet soda instead?' said Dr Frank Hu, a member of the writing group and chair of the nutrition department at Harvard University.
'The consensus is that for short-term weight control, it's OK. Certainly, it's not the best alternative...because we all know there are more healthy alternatives, such as water, low-fat and fat-free milk.'
However, a report from the CDC released in February 2017 found that teens' daily intake of milk also declined (from about 44 percent to 37 percent), as did 100 percent fruit juice intake (27 percent to 21.6 percent).
Although the FDA has labeled low and no-calorie sweeteners - sold under names such as Splenda and Sweet & Low - as 'generally recognized as safe', many of the experts say that this shouldn't be taken as a ringing endorsement.
'Artificial soda, there's nothing good about it,' said Christopher Gardner, director of Nutrition Studies at Stanford University, who was not part of the AHA advisory.
'There's nothing health-promoting about it. The only health-related role it has is as a transition beverage, replacing or displacing sugar-sweetened beverages.'
SINGAPORE: Seven major drinks companies including Coca-Cola and PepsiCo will limit the sugar content of drinks they sell in Singapore, as part of the city-state’s campaign to fight diabetes.
Tuesday, 22 August 2017 | MYT 10:36 PM
Daily sugar consumption per capita from soft drinks has risen since 2010 to 6.08 grammes in Asia-Pacific in 2016. The AFP photo shows a worker checking the flow of sugar inside the Gandavi sugar factory in India.
Singapore is one of the first countries in Asia to target sugary drinks, bringing it in line with many Western nations that have sought to mitigate the health risks associated with sugar through measures such as taxes and warning labels.
Globally, beverage firms have been reworking recipes, racing to cut sugar and introduced more options to cater to increasingly health-conscious consumers.
On Tuesday, Singapore’s ministry of health said the seven firms had signed an industry pledge to remove by 2020 drinks that contain more than 12% sugar from their portfolios of sugar-sweetened beverages.
As well as Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, the companies include F&N Foods, Malaysia Dairy Industries, Nestle, Pokka and Yeo Hiap Seng.
“In addition to this industry commitment, Coca-Cola Singapore is making an additional commitment to reduce the sugar content in our portfolio of sugar-sweetened beverages by 10% by 2020,” Coca-Cola said in an email to Reuters.
It said it had been reducing sugar and calories across many of its brands, and offering more new drinks with low sugar content or no added sugar.
Daily sugar consumption per capita from soft drinks has risen since 2010 to 6.08 grammes in Asia-Pacific in 2016, with Singapore at 11.99 grammes, according to market research firm Euromonitor. Consumption has been trending lower in Europe and the United States, but it is still higher than in Asia-Pacific.
“Governments in Asia are actively promoting healthy consumption, such as Malaysia which launched its Healthier Choices Logo in April 2017,” said Euromonitor International analyst Nathanael Lim. ”Consumers also have an increasing preference for beverages containing natural ingredients with zero sugar.”
The World Health Organization said last year drinking fewer calorific sweet drinks was the best way to curb excessive weight and prevent chronic diseases such as diabetes, although fat and salt in processed foods were also to blame.
Among Asian countries, the Philippines has slapped levies on sugar-sweetened beverages, while Indonesia and India have been considering similar taxes.
Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong mentioned the drinks makers’ agreement in a speech on Sunday, in which he also urged people to drink water, eat wholemeal bread and brown rice, but did provide details. - Reuters
Sugar is almost unavoidable in food and drink today. It makes up for 16 percent of our total energy intake and the largest source of it comes from sugary drinks. Regardless of this, most of us probably enjoy a soft drink with a meal - but even if that meal is particularly healthy, all those benefits could be rendered obsolete by the beverage.
A new study has found that drinking a sugar sweetened drink with a protein rich meal, affects our metabolism and builds up fat.
This limits the value of the protein which usually increases your satiety and your metabolism, but also decreases your intake of energy.
Steak and sugar
Research by BMC Nutrition wanted to see what happens to our bodily processes when we consume a sugar sweetened drink with a steak dinner.
To do this they asked volunteers to spend 24 hours in a metabolic chamber on two different occasions.
By being in the controlled chamber, scientists could measure how the body utilises food nutrients, how many grams of fat, protein and carbohydrates are being used, and how many calories are being burned.
They then analysed how the participants used the nutrients, by examining their oxygen consumption, carbon dioxide production and urinary nitrogen excretion.
All volunteers then ate the same exact types of food throughout the 24 hours.
This consisted of 15 percent protein during one day and 30 percent protein during the other day. Each meal was accompanied with a sugar-sweetened or artificially sweetened drink.
The results showed that drinking a sugary beverage with a meal decreased fat use, whilst having the same drink with a protein-rich meal decreased the fat use by 40 percent more.
They also discovered that of the calories absorbed from the drinks, only 80 of the 120 kcals were expended, which lead to a build up of 40 kcals regardless of level of protein in the meal.
Thus this shows the body's tendency to store fat from sugary drinks rather than burning it and adding more insight into the connection between these drinks and obesity.
So, next time your are out for steak dinner think twice about ordering that Coco-Cola.
Restaurants and other spaces catering to the public in France have been banned from offering unlimited sugary drinks in an effort to reduce obesity.
27 January 2017
It is now illegal to sell unlimited soft drinks at a fixed price or offer them unlimited for free.
The number of overweight or obese people in France is below the EU average but is on the rise.
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends taxing sugary drinks, linking them to obesity and diabetes.
Self-service "soda fountains" have long been a feature of family restaurants and cafes in some countries like the UK, where a soft drinks tax will be introduced next year.
The new law [in French] targets soft drinks, including sports drinks containing added sugar or sweeteners.
Obesity in Europe
Of people aged 18 and over in EU countries...
15.9%
are obese
Highest obesity in Malta 26%
Second lowest is Italy 10.7%
France 15.3%
Among children across EU 5.7%
Getty Images
All public eateries, from fast-food joints to school canteens, are affected.
The aim of the law is to "limit, especially among the young, the risks of obesity, overweight and diabetes" in line with WHO recommendations.
A recent Eurostat survey of adult obesity put the French at 15.3%, which is just below the EU average of 15.9%. France was slimmer than the UK (20.1%) but fatter than Italy (10.7%).
Past the age of 30, nearly 57% of French men are overweight or obese, according to a report published in October by the French medical journal Bulletin Epidemiologique Hebdomadaire.
Some 41% of women in the same age category are also overweight or obese, the study found.
The beverage giants Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have given millions of dollars to nearly 100 prominent health groups in recent years, while simultaneously spending millions to defeat public health legislation ...
A customer reaches for a soft drink at a market in California.Credit J. Michael Short for The New York Times
The beverage giants Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have given millions of dollars to nearly 100 prominent health groups in recent years, while simultaneously spending millions to defeat public health legislation that would reduce Americans’ soda intake, according to public health researchers.
The findings, published on Monday in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, document the beverage industry’s deep financial ties to the health community over the past five years, as part of a strategy to silence health critics and gain unlikely allies against soda regulations.
The study’s authors, Michael Siegel, a professor at the Boston University school of public health, and Daniel Aaron, a student at Boston University’s medical school, scoured public records including news releases, newspaper databases, lobbying reports, the medical literature and information released by the beverage giants themselves. While some of the incidents cited in the study already have been reported by news organizations, the medical journal report is the first to take a comprehensive look at the industry’s strategy of donating to health organizations while at the same time lobbying against public health measures. The study tracked industry donations and lobbying spending from 2011 through 2015, at a time when many cities were mulling soda taxes or other regulations to combat obesity.
“We wanted to look at what these companies really stand for,” said Mr. Aaron, the study’s co-author. “And it looks like they are not helping public health at all — in fact they’re opposing it almost across the board, which calls these sponsorships into question.”
Mr. Aaron said that the industry donations created “clear-cut conflicts of interest” for the health groups that accepted them.
The report found a number of instances in which influential health groups accepted beverage industry donations and then backed away from supporting soda taxes or remained noticeably silent about the initiatives.
In one instance cited in the study, the nonprofit group Save the Children, which had actively supported soda tax campaigns in several states, did an about face and withdrew its support in 2010. The group had accepted a $5 million grant from Pepsi and was seeking a major grant from Coke to help pay for its health and education programs for children.
Responding to the new research, Save the Children said, in a statement, that the group in 2010 had decided to focus on early childhood education, and that its decision to stop supporting soda taxes “was unrelated to any corporate support that Save the Children received.”
When New York proposed a ban on extra-large sodas in 2012, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics cited “conflicting research” and didn’t support the effort. The academy accepted $525,000 in donations from Coke in 2012. The following year it took a $350,000 donation from the company.
The academy said it no longer has a sponsorship relationship with the beverage firms.
The N.A.A.C.P. and the Hispanic Federation have publicly opposed anti-soda initiatives despite disproportionately high rates of obesity in black and Hispanic communities. Coke made more than $1 million in donations to the N.A.A.C.P. between 2010 and 2015, and more than $600,000 to the Hispanic Federation between 2012 and 2015. The groups did not respond to requests for comment.
“The beverage industry is using corporate philanthropy to undermine public health measures,” said Kelly D. Brownell, dean of the Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke, who was not involved in the new research.
The American Diabetes Association accepted $140,000 from the company between 2012 and 2014. The American Heart Association received more than $400,000 from Coke between 2010 and 2015. And the National Institutes of Health received nearly $2 million from Coke between 2010 and 2014.
In a statement, the heart association said the group is “leading efforts to reduce consumption of sugary drinks,” and the group has advocated for increased taxes on sugary drinks.
“To achieve our goals, we must engage a wide variety of food and beverage companies to be part of the solution,” the statement said. The soda sponsorship does not have “ any influence on our science and the public policy positions we advocate for.”
Coke referred questions about the study to their trade group, the American Beverage Association.
“We believe our actions in communities and the marketplace are contributing to addressing the complex challenge of obesity,” the beverage association said. “We stand strongly for our need, and right, to partner with organizations that strengthen our communities.”
The beverage association said it disagreed with public health advocates “on discriminatory and regressive taxes and policies on our products.”
In a statement PepsiCo said it is “incorrectly painted as a ‘soda company,’ when only a quarter of our global revenue comes from carbonated soft drinks.”
“We believe that obesity is a complex, multifaceted issue and that our company has an important role to play in addressing it - which includes engaging with public health organizations and responding to consumers’ demand for healthier products,” the statement said.
The New York Times last year reported that Coke had paid for scientific research that downplayed the link between sugary drinks and obesity. After that article was published, the beverage giant released a database showing that since 2010 it had spent more than $120 million on academic research and partnerships with health organizations involved in curbing obesity.
From 2011 to 2015, Coke spent on average more than $6 million per year lobbying against public health measures aimed at curbing soda consumption, according to data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Pepsi spent about $3 million per year during that period, and the American Beverage Association spent more than $1 million each year, the study found.
In 2009 alone, when the government proposed a federal soda tax to curb obesity that would help finance health care reform, Coke, Pepsi and the American Beverage Association spent a combined $38 million lobbying against the measure, which ultimately failed.
When the mayor of Philadelphia proposed a soda tax in 2010, the beverage industry offered $10 million to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia if the tax proposal was dropped. The City Council voted down the measure, and the beverage association later made the donation.
Philadelphia did ultimately impose a soda tax this year. The beverage industry filed a lawsuit in September, calling the tax illegal. The industry also is spending millions on advertising campaigns against soda taxes that are on the ballot in at least four cities this November – three in Northern California, and one in Boulder, Colo.
Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, said the paper shows that soda companies “want to have it both ways — appear as socially responsible corporate citizens and lobby against public health measures every chance they get.”
GETTY IMAGES