25.7M views · Jul 31, 2009 · 1:29:37 · 13 HN recommenders · 20 mentions · discussed 2010–2024
Robert Lustig of UCSF lectures on the biochemistry of sugar, arguing that fructose and lack of fiber drive the obesity epidemic via insulin. It is the widely viewed 90-minute talk that popularized the anti-sugar case.
Why Hacker News points people here: The most-linked YouTube video on HN, recommended as an in-depth explanation of fructose metabolism.
“This is one of the best nutritional videos I've ever seen.”HN comment, 2010
“This is one of the best nutritional videos I've ever seen.”
Peer-reviewed case for cutting out sugar
If you want some peer-reviewed background on why it's smart to cut out sugar and the foods to which it's added by manufacturers, do take a look at this video This is one of the best nutritional videos I've ever seen. There's a chunk of biochemistry in the middle but it's worth watching to the end! Don't miss it and add years to your life.
“See Robert H. Lustig's awesome expostion, Sugar: The Bitter Truth”
Explains endocrinology of why bodies cannot keep up with sugar intake
I think the point is that getting rid of the subsidies would let the price of HFCS increase and would be less attractive to food producers. Regarding the idea that sucrose is healthier than HFCS, I remain unconvinced. See Robert H. Lustig's awesome expostion, Sugar: The Bitter Truth: this video He explains the endocrinology behind why our bodies cannot stay ahead of our sugar intake.
“I highly recommend Dr. Lustig's video (UCTV) to learn more”
Explains how sugar, not fat, drives arterial damage
I agree with you. This article also mentions they're focusing on fats/saturated fats; which is also a terrible focus. The real danger is not fat, even saturated/trans-fats, but starches and sugar. The increase in these types of carbohydrates in products like baby formula is actually leading to obesity in infants! Excess sugar can stress arteries and damage them. Cholesterol is carried to these artier by lipids (LDLs and HDLs, which are not actually cholesterol, but proteins that carry it through your bloodstream). If you eat a lot of sugar, cholesterol can build up between the walls of arteries as they fix the damage. They can eventually break down the wall, releasing plaque into the bloodstream and potentially causing heart complications. I highly recommend Dr. Lustig's video (UCTV) to learn more: this video A few years back I switched to a keto normal fat/very low carb (excluding fiber) diet. I've lost weight, gained energy and have felt a lot better. Of course this isn't for everyone. Some people have a body type that lends itself to higher carb intake (I knew a runner who'd eat 30 bananas a week) and as always do your research, consult with your doctor, dietitian, etc. before drastic changes in your diet. It's a common myth that Adkins died of his own diet. He didn't, and Reuters rededicated their column implying that he did. I honestly wonder if the obesity epidemic would have gone down today if the world didn't dismiss his ideas, or the ideas of many nutritionist for decad
“here's a leading endocrinologist that's overturning decades of dogma.”
Leading endocrinologist challenging dietary dogma on fructose
If this article is correct, please explain why my blood pressure and cholesterol figures go through the roof when my diet includes fructose. Please also explain how and why everything goes back to normal when I cut fructose out entirely. I am an quite serious - I do not allow even trace amounts in sauces and mayo and the like, nor in hidden sources such as "agave nectar" (which is 50-90% fructose). Oh and BTW, I eat TONS of pasta, saturated fat (including butter), plants, and a really nice steak every month. I pour heavy whipping cream into my coffee every morning (not the usual trash, but the fancy expensive stuff free of polysorbate 80 and carrageenan.) Unless you're eating a fresh strawberry that hasn't been mutilated in a blender (and even then, not too many all at once), fructose makes you fat because it messes with your appetite regulation in the bad direction. Even a little fructose makes you hungry. Dietary fat (saturated or otherwise) does the exact opposite: all other things being equal, it makes you feel sated. Don't just take my experience over the last ten years into account - here's a leading endocrinologist that's overturning decades of dogma. He'll set you right: this video
“I'd highly recommend these two talks by Robert Lustig on the subject.”
Detailed explanation of fructose metabolism and the obesity epidemic
For anyone interested in a detailed explanation of fructose metabolism (and why it's bad for you), I'd highly recommend these two talks by Robert Lustig on the subject. The first one is about how the body reacts to fructose, and the second video is a follow-up that emphasizes how fructose has contributed to the obesity epidemic in the US and elsewhere. this video link
“If you want to watch a long presentation on what's going on, check this”
Long presentation on fructose metabolism and fat storage
This is further confirmation of a well-known phenomenon. If you want to watch a long presentation on what's going on, check this: this video Short version: Fructose is metabolized by your liver, results in a lot of nasty byproducts, your liver stores the excess energy as fat, etc.
“This is a relevant and very informative video about the impact of sugar on humans”
Informative talk on sugar's impact on humans
This is a relevant and very informative video about the impact of sugar on humans: this video I'd say that if you were to just dramatically reduce sugar you'll get results pretty quickly.
“Here's the video that started a lot of the public awareness of the issue”
Video that started much public awareness of sugar issue
Here's the video that started a lot of the public awareness of the issue: this video And there's also now a great documentary on Netflix called "Fed Up" ( link ), for anyone who has a subscription. It particularly tackles this silly idea that it's okay to eat and drink shitty food all day, so long as you exercise for a little bit too.
“Most of it is uncontroversial.”
Detailed explanation of fructose versus glucose metabolism
This is almost right, but still manages to be dangerously wrong. Frustose and glucose are very different, one never gets converted to the other. All cells can and will take up and metabolize glucose, but only the liver can import and metabolize fructose. Metabolically, fructose does not behave like a carbohydrate, but like alcohol. Insulin affects mostly fat, muscle and liver cells. They react by storing the excess glucose, which they do harmlessly. Excess glucose does not cause insulin tolerance; fructose seems to do that, thought I don't remember the whole mechanism. Neither chitin nor lignin are carbohydrates, lignin isn't even chemically related. Even ruminants can't digest lignin, only a few funghi can do that. At any rate, the bottom line is that frustose is a problem, glucose isn't, and lumping both under "carbs" confuses matters. See this video for lots of details. (But don't take Dr. Lustig's words at face value---check other sources. Most of it is uncontroversial.)
“Despite the baity titles, it's a good talk with real biochemistry.”
Good talk on sugar metabolism with real biochemistry
Robert Lustig does a good talk about sugar metabolism in "Sugar: The Bitter Truth": this video Also, "The Trouble with Fructose": link Despite the baity titles, it's a good talk with real biochemistry. Edit: better video added up top
“Watch how the metabolism of alcohol and fructose compare”
Compares metabolism of alcohol and fructose
For starters, stop ingesting all things that have fructose in them. The U.S. government is really kind of complicit in allowing the spread of diabetes and NASH to happen in the first place by allowing harmful substances such as high-fructose corn syrup and to be infused into anything you can find in a store or fast food. Sure, it's ultimately an issue of education, but when the vast majority of foods have this stuff in them, educating every person on non eating most of the available foods in stores becomes very difficult. Watch how the metabolism of alcohol and fructose compare: this video
“Go to an expert: Dr. Robert Lustig, Endocrinologist at UCSF.”
Expert describes sugar metabolic pathways; fructose turned to fat by liver
Don't take my word for it (how bad sugar is). Go to an expert: Dr. Robert Lustig, Endocrinologist at UCSF. "Sugar, the Bitter Truth" [0]. He'll describe the metabolic pathways of sugar. Key take-away: fructose is processed by the liver, and much of its calories is turned to fat. [0] this video
“It does have 11M views, however, and it is a great talk.”
Great talk, surprisingly the most-linked YouTube video on HN
I watched this video a few days ago and was surprised to see is the #1 youtube link. It does have 11M views, however, and it is a great talk.
“There is a lot of evidence that sugar is bad for you.”
Lecture on evidence that sugar harms health
There is a lot of evidence that sugar is bad for you. See this video Nassim Taleb says carbs are one of the 3 most dangerous addictions, besides a paycheck and heroin. Obviously some carbohydrate is necessary and good for you but the less the better. Trader Joe's has these kickass "a complete salad" kits in their refrigerated produce section that I highly recommend. They have great nutritive value, taste great, aren't too expensive, and I feel aMaZiNg hours after eating them.
“he says HFCS is no worse than sugar”
Lustig argues HFCS and sugar are equally harmful in typical quantities
In the anti-sugar video by Donald Lustig, pediatric endocrinologist, that's been posted here a million times, he says HFCS is no worse than sugar - they're both terrible for you in the quantities people consume these days. This makes sense because they're chemically essentially the same thing (sucrose is a disaccharide of glucose and fructose, whereas HFCS is mix of glucose and fructose monosaccharides in proportions that may slightly skew towards fructose or glucose depending on the formulation. The disaccharides of sucrose are broken up in the body anyway, so in the end there's no clinically significant difference. Lustig didn't think the difference was important). If there's anything misleading going on here, it's that people think that "real" sugar is OK. I guess it'll give you natural diabetes. Obligatory link to the video: this video
“I'd love to hear some opinions on the following talk from fellow HNers”
Talk on sugar's effects, shared for opinions
Man. Sugar is the worst. Take it from me. I moved to the city the moment I turned 18, I didn't know much about cooking. Back in the 'burbs you'd be lucky to live within 10km of a grocery store. Downtown however, totally different story. I went NUTS with sweets and pizza. I gained over 100 lbs in just under half a year. I was eating around 10k calories a day. I then stuck to only these foods and have only been eating this the past couple years: chicken lean beef kale + other greens various fruit cheese That's it. No seasoning, nothing. I'm so much happier now. Better sleeps, better mood, better everything. My mood and days fluctuated like crazy when I didn't keep track of my diet. I'd love to hear some opinions on the following talk from fellow HNers: this video
“Fructose is actually much more poisonous then glucose is.”
Supports claim that fructose is metabolized like alcohol
It is very important to distinguish between fructose and glucose sugars. Fructose is actually much more poisonous then glucose is. It seems metabolized mostly like alcohol. Now, with the high fructose corn syrup everywhere, makes the situation not better. this video EDIT: fructose is not so problematic if it's still embedded in fibers like in fruit. Bacteria then eat most of it, before it is absorbed.
“Robert Lustig - Professor and pediatric endocrinologist at UCSF who speaks out against added dietary sugar.”
Lustig as an authority speaking out against added sugar
There have been several documentaries about this issue in the past few years: - Sugar Coated (2015) - That Sugar Film (2014) - Fed Up (2014) Some of the authorities who are found in these movies are: Robert Lustig - Professor and pediatric endocrinologist at UCSF who speaks out against added dietary sugar. See: this video Gary Taubes - journalist and author of Good Calories, Bad Calories: Challenging the Conventional Wisdom on Diet, Weight Control, and Disease and Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It Yoni Freedhoff - Medical doctor from Ottawa, Canada who criticizes the food industry's use of sugar. See: link It seems like a case is building, much like the case against the tobacco industry. Maybe there will be class-action lawsuits against soft drink and processed food companies based on recent suppression of potentially life-saving research.
“Fructose and ethanol follow the same biochemical metabolic pathways and are equally harmful.”
Supports claim fructose and ethanol share metabolic pathways
Fructose and ethanol follow the same biochemical metabolic pathways and are equally harmful. You just don't get buzzed from fructose. this video
“Fructose is metabolized by the liver[0] ~identically to ethanol.”
Source for Lustig's argument that fructose is poison like alcohol
> Fructose is usually considered healthier than sucrose or glucose - the whole "natural fruit sugars are OK" premise - though that seems likely to be nonsense given it's immediately and easily converted to glucose after you eat it. I don't know of any argument that says it's poisonous, or in any sense worse than glucose. That also seems unlikely to be true for the same reason - it's immediately converted to glucose. Fructose is metabolized by the liver[0] ~identically to ethanol. This is why Robert Lustig (the Sugar: The Bitter Truth[1] dude) argues fructose is a poison, and taxing it like alcohol. AIUI it's arguably the cause of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: link Your comment strikes me as confusing several factors... fructose does not turn into glucose upon eating it. But something like that is applicable to Sucrose vs. HFCS, rendering them ~identical in consumption (a split of glucose and fructose). That's orthogonal to what the body does with the fructose though. Furthermore it's intact fruit that is seen as healthier because of the dietary fiber, not because of the fructose. The fructose is always a problem for the liver to deal with when absorbed. Fiber helps by slowing/preventing its absorption, in the best case letting it reach the large intestine to turn into flatulence via guttural flora before the body can absorb it. [0] link [1] this video
