As a journalist, I'm dedicated to digging up the truth. For my book SUGAR SHOCK!, my researchers and I poured over hundreds of medical studies, and I carefully came to conclusion -- with the help of some 250 medical experts -- that over-consuming sugary foods and refined carbs could lead to a host of health problems, including robbing your body of vitamins and minerals and causing you to take in less of the higher quality, nutrient-rich foods.
Therefore, I'm absolutely flabbergasted by this seemingly impartial review just published in the British Journal of Nutrition, which concludes, from looking at 15 studies conducted since 1980, that there was insufficient evidence and too much inconsistency between studies to convincingly argue that a high-sugar diet results in lower micronutrient intakes.
Let me reiterate: My extensive research and interviews over five years of working on my book lead me to conclude exactly the opposite.
But, this is the finding, according to two seemingly non-biased researchers M. Barbara E. Livingstone, a nutrition professor at the University of Ulster in Ireland, and Kirsten L. Rennie(couldn't find a bio online).
I'm still trying to find out the funding source, because that can provide valuable tell-tale information.
Thank goodness the review does at least acknowledge that this is not the final word.
"Further research is required to determine which food products high in added sugars might adversely affect micronutrient intakes by displacing other food items from the diet," the report notes.
Oh, you've got to hear about another finding which I find almost laughable.
As the U.K.'s Sugar Bureau gleefully crows (in a press release, entitled, "New study reviews empty calories theory"), "while some studies show that intake of certain micronutrients appears to decrease with added sugar in the diet, other studies show that increased amounts of added sugar are associated with an increased intake of vitamins and minerals."
Did I hear right? You've absolutely got to be kidding! Who funded those studies?
As a journalist, I'm dedicated to digging up the truth. For my book SUGAR SHOCK!, my researchers and I poured over hundreds of medical studies, and I carefully came to conclusion -- with the help of some 250 medical experts -- that over-consuming sugary foods and refined carbs could lead to a host of health problems, including robbing your body of vitamins and minerals and causing you to take in less of the higher quality, nutrient-rich foods.
Therefore, I'm absolutely flabbergasted by this seemingly impartial review just published in the British Journal of Nutrition, which concludes, from looking at 15 studies conducted since 1980, that there was insufficient evidence and too much inconsistency between studies to convincingly argue that a high-sugar diet results in lower micronutrient intakes.
Let me reiterate: My extensive research and interviews over five years of working on my book lead me to conclude exactly the opposite.
I'm still trying to find out the funding source, because that can provide valuable tell-tale information.
Thank goodness the review does at least acknowledge that this is not the final word.
"Further research is required to determine which food products high in added sugars might adversely affect micronutrient intakes by displacing other food items from the diet," the report notes.
Oh, you've got to hear about another finding which I find almost laughable.
As the U.K.'s Sugar Bureau gleefully crows (in a press release, entitled, "New study reviews empty calories theory"), "while some studies show that intake of certain micronutrients appears to decrease with added sugar in the diet, other studies show that increased amounts of added sugar are associated with an increased intake of vitamins and minerals."
Did I hear right? You've absolutely got to be kidding! Who funded those studies?