Sugar confusion and some (relatively) sane advice from Holford
There’s a story in in the Mail regarding obesity and sugar consumption. The content in itself is rather dubious, Professor Glenn Gaesser of Univ. of Virginia is claiming that carbohydrates are not fattening but he is part funded by the baking industry. Conflict of interests may arise here I feel.
In the comments we also have some great confusion about what is and isn’t a complex carbohydrate. One comment says:
I’ve limited my carbohydrate intake to complex carbs only (veg and such) and all but eliminated simple carbs (breads, pasta etc) and in the past 6 weeks have lost over 2 stone. Not only that, but I’m less tired, and have had more motivation to exercise and be healthy.
- T. Wolf, Manchester
<pedant>
Complex carbohydrates are things like starch, i.e. polysaccharides, which are found in abundance in bread and pasta. Simple sugars (glucose, fructose) on the other hand are found in “veg and such”.
</pedant>
Most amazingly in this piece is some actually rather sane words everyones favourite pill-peddling media nutritionist Mr Prof. Patrick Holford.
His findings were questioned by British nutritionist Patrick Holford, who said animal studies had shown high-carbohydrate diets “convert rapidly into fat”.
He added: “The old idea was that the way to lose weight was to eat less calories, which is what Gaesser is advocating.
“Gaesser is supporting what has been done for the last 20 years and clearly it’s not working.
“The human body is much more complicated and blood sugar is much more important.”
(emphasis mine)
Yes Patrick, the human is much more complicated which is why some of us would wish you’d leave the health advice to those who are qualified.
