Is sugar poison?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 май 2024
- Get the 5 Tactics in My Longevity Toolkit and my weekly newsletter here (free): bit.ly/4dESTaq
Watch the full episode: • 300-Special episode: P...
Become a member to receive exclusive content: bit.ly/3O0pEnY
This clip is from episode 300 ‒ Special episode: Peter on exercise, fasting, nutrition, stem cells, geroprotective drugs, & more.
In this clip, they discuss:
- Is sugar poison?
- Is alcohol a poison?
- What are the most harmful health effects of sugar consumption?
- And more
--------
About:
The Peter Attia Drive is a deep-dive podcast focusing on maximizing longevity, and all that goes into that from physical to cognitive to emotional health. With over 90 million episodes downloaded, it features topics including exercise, nutritional biochemistry, cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer’s disease, cancer, mental health, and much more.
Peter Attia is the founder of Early Medical, a medical practice that applies the principles of Medicine 3.0 to patients with the goal of lengthening their lifespan and simultaneously improving their healthspan.
Learn more: peterattiamd.com
Connect with Peter on:
Facebook: bit.ly/PeterAttiaMDFB
Twitter: bit.ly/PeterAttiaMDTW
Instagram: bit.ly/PeterAttiaMDIG
Subscribe to The Drive:
Apple Podcast: bit.ly/TheDriveApplePodcasts
Overcast: bit.ly/TheDriveOvercast
Spotify: bit.ly/TheDriveSpotify
Google Podcasts: bit.ly/TheDriveGoogle
Disclaimer: This podcast is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute the practice of medicine, nursing, or other professional healthcare services, including the giving of medical advice. No doctor-patient relationship is formed. The use of this information and the materials linked to this podcast is at the user's own risk. The content on this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Users should not disregard or delay in obtaining medical advice for any medical condition they have, and they should seek the assistance of their healthcare professionals for any such conditions. I take conflicts of interest very seriously. For all of my disclosures and the companies I invest in or advise, please visit my website where I keep an up-to-date and active list of such companies. For a full list of our registered and unregistered trademarks, trade names, and service marks, please review our Terms of Use: peterattiamd.com/terms-of-use/ 
Наука
After I was diagnosed with cancer in 2023, I pretty much eliminated almost all white sugar from my diet. I ended up losing about 40 lb through chemo and just dietary changes. No love loss because I was overweight anyway. The biggest takeaway for me is I feel better physically without the sugar and I've been able to maintain my weight loss just by not eating things that are loaded with sugar or anything processed for that matter. My oncologist doesn't seem to think that diet makes a difference with cancer, but who knows. I keep doing what I need to do to feel better and healthy and eliminating sugar was one of those things.
That's Brilliant 👏 All the best to you!!
I wish you all the best from the bottom of my heart!
All the best to you😘
Big up Brother
All the best. Seems to make a huge difference with how we feel for sure
The thing that is often missed in this discussion is the amounts. One cup of blueberries has about 5g of fructose. An orange has 4g. A 12oz bottle of soda has almost 20g of fructose.
In fruit, that fructose is bound up with fiber, minerals, vitamins. In soda or candy, it's immediate released and unless you are currently running, biking, or swimming hard to use those sugars in your muscles, those sugars then float around causing problems
Pretty sure that alcohol is a poison, regardless of the amount.
So is water or breathing oxygen
@@tobik2627 it's true about alcohol it's always poisonous no matter the amount. Also if you ask most people 'is alcohol poisonous' they will say 'yes, that's why you moderate your intake'. Not 'well the dosage defines the poison'. Eating dessert with every main meal, putting sugar into all beverages, sugary cereal, constant cake binging, chocolate bars etc, people can do this every day and it's normalized whereas if they were doing the same with alcohol you would call them an alcoholic.
@@LukeMosse I don't care what "most people" would say. "The dosage makes the poison" is the correct answer. Consuming one alcoholic beverage once a month would have zero measurable impact on your health, short term or long term. Consuming 10 drinks a day would have a measurable impact on your health. Consuming a candy bar once a week is not going to harm your health. Consuming 10 a day would impact your health. The only argument you can make in favor of anything being a poison is if there is nothing positive about its consumption (like cyanide). Alcohol and sugar consumption do both have positive benefits. Alcohol has social benefits (which does impact overall human health) and sugar can supply quick energy which has various use-cases in exercise and sports. Neither is a poison outright.
Thanks god it's prohibited in islam , I don't mean any offense to other religions
@@nichtsistkostenlos6565 the dosage makes the poison? theres absolutely nothing good in alcohol. You can eat 10 grams of shit everyday and you would probably not die. That doesn't make it good. Sugar at least gives you energy. What does alcohol have that is positive to your body?
Here are the key takeaways from Peter Attia's discussion on whether sugar is poison:
1. **Contextual Definition of Poison:** Attia emphasizes that the term "poison" depends on dose, frequency, and context of consumption. He argues that many substances, including sugar, can be toxic in excessive amounts but not inherently poisonous in moderate quantities.
2. **Comparative Analysis:** By comparing sugar to other substances like acetaminophen and alcohol, Attia illustrates that even commonly used substances can become toxic if misused, suggesting that toxicity is more about usage patterns than the inherent properties of a substance.
3. **Sugar's Biochemical Impact:** The effects of sugar, specifically different types such as sucrose or fructose, should be assessed based on their biochemical impacts at varying doses and metabolic conditions, rather than simply labeling them as poisonous.
4. **Misinterpretation and Overstatement in Data:** Attia points out that data regarding sugar consumption often get misrepresented or overstated, particularly concerning its impact on overall calorie intake and metabolic health.
5. **Controlled Intake Experiments:** Reference to experimental studies, like the mouse study, shows that under controlled calorie intake, sugar in different forms does not significantly affect body weight, though the impact on other metabolic parameters might vary with higher doses.
6. **Personal Experience and Activity Level:** Attia shares personal anecdotes to demonstrate that high sugar consumption may not be detrimental in the context of high physical activity, highlighting the importance of lifestyle context.
7. **Dietary Patterns Over Isolated Nutrients:** He advises focusing on overall dietary patterns rather than obsessing over single nutrients like sugar. This broader perspective helps in understanding and managing health more effectively.
8. **Individualized Nutritional Advice:** Attia advocates for nutritional recommendations that are tailored to individual metabolic health, body composition, and lifestyle factors, rather than one-size-fits-all advice.
9. **Ongoing Research:** The podcast hints at ongoing research into the specific roles of different types of sugar, like fructose, in conditions such as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), indicating a nuanced and evolving understanding of sugar's health impacts.
These takeaways underscore a nuanced view of sugar, advocating for a balanced and informed approach to dietary sugar rather than categorical demonization.
Thank you. Well done.
Thank you!
It is something that the body can use rather than pass it through and excrete it. Don't take more sugar than the body can use up you'll rock.
Thanks
Very nice, thanks!
Dose determines the answer.
Frequency of dosing is key here as well. Sugar is a poison taken in large doses over a long period of time. BUT, its also very addictive in a sneaky way. And its in damn near EVERYTHING.
@@rodgerbane3825 what do you think about drinking 500ml of soft drink once per month?
Seems like he’s saying if you eat a healthy well balanced diet, then a sugary dessert won’t hurt you so long as your total caloric intake is kept in check. Just common sense!
Yes, that seems to be the message but it's easily lost in his excess verbiage to discuss fructose vs other types of sugar etc...
Like so many things in life, I think the problem with sugar is as much behavioral as biochemical. Anecdotally, there definitely seems to be a portion of the populace who needs to avoid sugar at all costs the way some people need to avoid alcohol or gambling - and while there probably is less overall harm in avoiding sugar than not, it's still a mistake to make blanket statements like "sugar is poison" or "sugar is fine".
If you're of pre-agrarian European background your ancestors only had access to carbohydrates seasonally for a week or two yearly, all other times they would have been eating meat. Your body treats exogenous carbs as a poison, it does what it can to quickly remove them from the blood, excrete them, and store what it can't excrete temporarily to be excreted shortly thereafter. This exactly what your body does with oxalates, another poison. Exogenous carbs are a poison, your body treats it as such, it has fat stores and gluconeogenesis because it doesn't need to consume carbs to run at all. Once fat adapted (which is how we're born) you create your own ATP from fat at the cellular level faster than you can consume exogenous carbs and burn them via aerobic glycolysis, which creates significant amounts of lactic acid and eventually leads to and feeds cancer.
Is there anything that is not toxic if over-consumed?
Super Mario Kart
Everything in moderation except laughter, sex, vegetables and fish.
@@harifederer and Super Mario Kart
Thanks for this info Doc.
What an honest and refreshing answer
What I'm getting from this is that things looked at as generally unhealthy for you, aren't necessarily inherently bad, but it's the moderation and/or frequency with which you supply your body these foods/substances etc. that contribute to your overall well-being. So a cookie here and there is fine, but a whole box of Samoa's, and then cake for desert, not a great idea. Moderation control is something I've struggled with my whole life. Good luck everyone!
I’m pretty low carb and eat little sugar . Fasting insulin 1.7 - I recently ate unconsciously xxlarge amount of Swedish fish . Following a shoulder surgery in which I was fasted and on pain meds . The next day I was water logged -my weight went from 185 to 205lbs. Most of water was concentrated to my lower extremities especially lower back and feet . I looked like the elephant man. Freaked me out - I noticed I wasn’t urinating I was drinking a gallon of water with electrolytes added to it. I didn’t have carbs for the next few days. Water disappeared and I got back to normal. Was it over consumption of Swedish fish? I’m assuming it was I’ll never touch them again. Lesson learned.😮
Perhaps the swedish fish preserved i a brine solution? To me it sounds like you ingested a lot of sodium somehow
@@Mrgasman1978Swedish fish is a candy.
@lisaware9697 thanks for specifying it. I didn't know that. We don't have that in Europe.
It's a carbo-hydrate. It attracts water. You're probably not used to having your muscles store that much glycogen.
Short version….discussion is very much context dependent.
"We're gonna very simplify it" killed me. Come on.
My father-in-law who's 97, always says about sugar. "That stuff is dynamite!" I laugh but he's damn right.
Can you elaborate on the diff between acute health and fitness in young ppl using bmi and metabolicly optimal health for overall life heath... oh, you just did. Thx!!
Im glad i saw this since im eating donuts atm
The clinical studies have been done for NAFLD, but in isocaloric overfeeding studies. saturated fat is the worst, carbs middle, unsaturated fats are the best in terms of adding less hepatic fat when overfed. Look up Ching Jian et al. Clin Nutr. 2021 Jan.
OK, a limited calorie, iso-caloric diet of glucose vs fructose didn't produce different metabolic states. But if they could all eat ad libitum, would the fructose mice swell up more?
I rarely crave sugar these days. Every now and then, I love a Mexican Coke. I have to have sugar when I participate in endurance events, and I try to use gels that are tart or a little salty because I just loathe that sticky sweet flavor and texture. It makes my teeth ring in pain. I'm much more of a salt enthusiast. Sugars are needed, but like the Doc said, fruit (and complex carbohydrates) are a much more sustainable option. Also, I think another part of the equation is that we're pretty neglectful of dietary fiber in this country.
If you listen to Peter, it's his opinion when he says "I think" he is not referring to any studies, just his biases. I have noticed this in his Red Meat vlog. Please be aware that Peter has changed his dietary patterns and his training along side other stuff
Yeah Peter seems to be advocating excercise over diet.
Thats because there aren't any good studies on this topic. He mentions that briefly when he says he hasn't seen any data on this
I limit sugar intake as well for the same reason but maybe it's worse for me because I have a family inherited thing that is thicker saliva than usual so the saliva doesn't clean as well as people that have typical saliva density. I also saw a video about sugar being fuel for cancer and that also makes me limit it. I'm surprised you didn't call it poison because of the cancer thing.
I think he was saying why eat empty calories with refined sugar treats when fruit are sweet and they are full of fiber and helpful vitamins.
What if the question was rephrased as 'is sugar that comes in a pack (not fructose in fruits or lactose in dairy products) poison?
Would have been great if he touched on insulin resistance. If sugar has the potential to spike insulin more severely, wouldn't that be a reason to avoid it for longevity purposes?
He did an interview with Gerald Shulman that'll tell you exactly what causes insulin resistance.
the episode contained words like "DAG" and "ceramides" and "AKT" and "IRS1".
hint: sugar's not causative, blood sugar spikes are not causative in insulin resistance.
Exercise causes blood pressure rise therefore people should not do exercise to avoid hypertension.
Short term changes in the body do not necessarily predict long term changes. Exercise may increase blood pressure in short term but lowers it in long term. Sugar may cause blood glucose rise in short term but is not going to lead to insulin resistance in long term provided you don't become overweight.
I think it was John Yudkin who said that there is no substance that is absolutely toxic. Everything is a matter of dosage. Whether or not it was a good idea Doctors used to prescribe small amounts of Arsenic as medicine. People have been known to die from consuming too much water. Having said that, fructose is like crack-cocaine to me and I've had to struggle to avoid it in processed foods. My tolerance for fructose has diminished with each decade of life, as has my activity. Since fructose is only processed by the liver (and kidneys), IMO it is best to avoid it, especially if you are overweight. In many ways asking young healthy Doctors their opinions on sugar and fructose is like asking a teenager what they feel about aging. I would put more stock in their opinions if they were 70 years old and had regained a healthy BMI after recently having been obese.
Doctor Attia has a point : if you exercise a lot ,like I do, glucids intake is not an issue , you have to burn the energy that glucids provides. I am happy to hear him, he is excellent, not like these keto diet gurus....
My bet is that the biggest risk from sugar (whether sucrose or fructose) is not really from the sugar itself but from the fact that it's a highly "processed" food, and by "processed", I mean it's been isolated as a single molecule, and especially has no accompanying minerals or fiber...it's a non-whole food-energy source. When we consume too much of such foods as a percentage of our total calories, we are very likely to be in a mineral and fiber deficit, maybe fatty acids and proteins as well, let's say all the non-carb stuff...all nutrient intake should follow along proportionately to our total daily calorie intake needs...to be on the safe side. So, I'd say sugar is a fine fuel but must be accompanied by enough other non-carb nutrients to keep us in total balance, not just in energy balance. Balance is not balance unless it's total.
I still remember watching a Chris McCormick interview(a 6 time iron man champion), said he drinks Coke after the race
Do you consider the trials involving metabolically unhealthy children that Dr. Lustig had referenced to several times, that under iso-caloric conditions, without weight loss and not changing food quality. substituting glucose for fructose did change the bio markers and NAFLD in less than two weeks?
Calorie and protein equated low carb and low fat diets show little or no significant change during weight loss periods.
As a single data point I am a 32 yo very active male athlete who regularly consumes "poison" I eat at calorie maintenance, have been same body weight for 13 years ±2lbs. Around 12-13% BF. Have seen no negative side effects physically, biochemicall, or mentally. Sugar for me is another macro nothing more nothing less
Idk that is helpful to someone but the fear mongering over sugar should be taken with an entire salt shaker IMO
It’s a nuanced response from Peter and refreshing to listen to. As he says, over consumption of sugar clearly isn’t desirable but show us the data that points to sugar being the culprit in isolation when calories are in fact equated. I cannot find a single RCT which demonstrates this. There are many doctors in the podcast space these days, including the likes of Lustig, demonzing sugar for being the single main cause of health issues when in reality the problem has always been the overconsumption of calories. The problem with sugar is its association with highly palatable caloric dense foods/drinks that enable us to easily over consume calories. But statements like sugar is poison and addictive are both grossly misguided and misleading
Well is certainly wins the award for being HIGHLY addictive!
Omg any chance you guys could go on a Circe to study brevity
Is it poison for people with type 2 diabetes or again, not if they are in calorie controlled situations?
People with type 2 diabetes should be trying to reverse their insulin resistance and there is copious evidence (basically a consensus) that fructose in table sugar and HFCS causes insulin resistance (as does saturated fat) when consumed in a certain manner. So yeah it's worsening the problem.
Sugar and fat together is definitely delicious and quite unnatural, apart from milk, natural foods that have one, don’t usually have the other.
The bigger problem is people don't know how to think, so they want everything to be whittled down to fun catchphrases. There are some good ones- "everything in moderation" for example- but figuring out what's useful requires some effort and thought.
Maybe a better way to ask this question, what is our single most significant national health threat?
I would say from a medical and dental standpoint, it has to be excess sugar. We likely spend more as a national health issue on excess sugar in our diet, than any other single entity.
Alcohol, smoking, street drugs, lack of moment and then sugar in processed foods. Of course all are very nuanced.
Sugar consumption is DOWN in recent years, yet obesity is UP because people ignore dietary fat.
When people think of highly processed food with a lot of sugar, they ignore the fats of that same foods.
@@newcomer87 High saturated fat and high fructose (in table sugar and HFCS) are both established as the main causal factors of the obesity epidemic. That's the mainstream view.
@Molecule7CVD and Cancer are a medical diagnosis and sure, the two leading causes of death. But what are the risk factors and causative agents leading to CVD and cancer that create the single most significant threat to these (and other) diseases? What is the single leading item in the USA that creates the largest health burden in the United States? That was the intent of my question. I would say it is obesity from excess sugar and lack of exercise. If you throw in dental expenditures in the mix, our nation no doubt spends more combatting the effects of excess sugar than any other single item.
It's comfort. America loves comfort. Sugar is one small fraction of that.
Where does pass to being a dose of
only if you eat it.
I found out in May, 2022 that i am allergic to cane sugar. It is so hard to avoid, but i am doing it.
There is no allergy for cane sugar
I'm really curious how you "found out" that you were allergic to sugar. Allergies are generally to proteins, not carbs. If you took a "food sensitivity" test, then congrats, you got scammed.
This discussion here adds value to this topic but the two I rely on when it comes to 'everything about sugar' are Lustig and Jamnadas. Lustig has specifically said he thinks desert should be limited to once a week. Hell I WISH I could only eat it that seldom lol.
Look up Layne Norton's reply to Lustig's appearance on Huberman.
I dare you to watch that not throw up the next time you hear Lustig.
@@SanjeevSharma-vk1yo I have. That's from the beginning of this year. Show me where in that hour long video of nonsense where he debunks Lustig lol.
@@keithzastrow
ruclips.net/video/LZPKTaVB1IU/видео.html
@@keithzastrow
If you can't see where Lustig's incompetent or a flat out LYING about the soda versus milk study you have serious mental health issues.
@@keithzastrow
I really doubt you saw the video I'm talking about. As badly as Aragon wrecked Lustig back in the day, this is 100 times worse.
Layne and a cancer researcher knock down Lustig's points again and again and again.
And at the end of the show Layne shows something that is EMBARRASSING for Lustig.
It’s the only way he can really answer this, given who he is.
For all intents and purposes, avoid sugar if you want to be healthy, not least because of its addictive properties.
What a gloriously uneducated, silly thing to say. Sugar is not addictive, highly palatable foods are, many of which have sugar as part of their recipe.
"Avoid sugar" is such a ridiculous statement. So no fruit? No carrots? No tomatoes? No onions? Is rice OK even though it's got almost no sugar but is quickly turned into glucose in the body, same as sugar?
You have no clue what you're talking about.
Is pugar soison?
Water can be toxic as well. You retain too much for too long.
As an ultra-runner, I utilize Dextrose all the time. Great way to get those carbs right to the blood!
Glucose is fine it's the molecule the body is set up to use. It's fructose that is the issue.
fructose is not the issue
@@estebronvideos3469 there's an abundance of science on fructose causing metabolic issues. Google Scholar it.
@@LukeMosse your liver PREFERS fructose over glucose to make glycogen.
Liver grabs 20% of glucose and 80% of fructose in 1st-pass metabolism.
And liver glycogen fullness is one of the cues your brain uses to figure
out whether to be hungry or not.
Sounds like its mostly behavioral. Sugar makes you consume more other calories than you need rather than outright risk of eating sugar.
Yeah, nobody going ham on pure sugar though. They consume it along with a bunch of fats
Why does Peter premise his answers with a distinction between fructose vs glucose when the question is about "sugar" in general? His general message seems to be that there is no evidence that modest amounts of sugar are harmful, or "poisonous", but being concise in this respect would be more effective...
Rob lustig will not be afraid to answer your question straight up
Lustig's both wrong and an asshat.
Look up Layne Norton's response to Lustig's bullshittery on Huberman.
Lustig's both wrong and an asshat. If he's not maliciously lying because he thinks the audience he cultivated wants those lies, then he's incompetent.
I come from western UP in India and abrout 30 yrs back most farmers are loads of suger and ni one has heard of diabetes and they all had athelete like bodies. The secret...they worked very hard in the fields. So it depends on how much calories one spends
Refined fats devoid of micronutrients are a much bigger issue than sugars
Nuance is Nuance.....😊
Me being fine after years of eating 100+ grams of fructose from whole fruit, also eating saturated fat from meat
According to today’s knowledge, scientific evidence and anecdotal information, moderate sugar intake, accompanied by a very well rounded diet (fiber , protein, fat) and active lifestyle, does not negatively affect a person’s health or weight whatsoever. Sugar alone is not the culprit for anything. Like with everything else is the how much of something and who is consuming it that makes the difference. I am always ready to learn from new scientific discoveries but for now… the sugar is poison is not my motto 😅
The general scientific consensus is that typical sugar consumption and typical saturated fat consumption have been driving the obesity epidemic by causing insulin resistance and in turn the behaviours of lethargy and overeating that cause obesity. People in countries like the US and UK etc are overconsuming sugar and saturated fat that's why they have obesity epidemics. They aren't eating sugar in the moderation you describe.
Exactly, I agree with you! But it’s the sugar fault or is the overconsumption? If we all start to overconsume rice and get arsenic poisoning, is that the rice being toxic or population overconsumption?
@@Caferramarta Given that all poisons are dose-dependent, it's a non-starter to get stuck on that point. When we ask 'is sugar a poison' there's a point which we're obviously trying to get at which is 'is sugar poisoning people'. Yes it's poisoning people.
Definitely . The point I am trying to make is that words have power. When you make a statement like “sugar is poisoning people” most will translate in AVOID SUGAR AT ALL COSTS. When regarding food these kind of statements are dangerous as we can say that for most food categories. Many don’t have the power to differentiate between moderation and avoidance and they end up confuse, sick and with nothing left on the plate. We could advocate for a mindful consumption instead of scaring people away using words like poison or toxic. That’s all.
@@Caferramarta I don't mean to be a contrary fairy, but I kind of disagree when it comes to table sugar. It's too normalized - people consume it daily for example in their cereal, tea and coffee and having desert with every meal, also having huge slices of cake at every social gathering etc. It's too normalized and it should be mentally in the same category as alcohol - which most people a) realise is toxic/poisonous and b) moderate accordingly. People aren't going to stop eating sugar if they know it's poisonous, it tastes too good. But they should know that in the manner in which we are tending to consume it on average, yes it is poisoning us. It causes insulin resistance.
What about addiction? I mean cyanide is poison but you don't get addictive to it. Alcohol, heroin, cocaine, opium, nicotine are addictive substances. I think sugar is different than cyanide as a poison but is it addictive to the point of make us sick?
Nope.
Listen on 1.5x at least
Processed food manufacturers need to hear from consumers that less sugar is wanted in their food products.
Why is there so much sugar in everything, even bread. That's just crazy
Email, text, tweet or phone your favorite producer of poison and let them know consumers want less salt, oils and sugars in their products.
Let their customer service department know that all the extra added salt, oil and sugar is not necessary or desired and is causing health issues.
So many words for a: Yes, no but actually yes.
A simple yes or no would of been sufficient
As everything in life: it depends
In the amount is the poison
Dont demonize it
If you do a lot of endurance sport you have to Take some product with sugar like gel or énergétique drink with sugar to perform but the rest of the time protéines it's better😊
I wouldnt say its poison, unless u eat sugar laden foods every day. I eat very little. Nobody needs to add sugar to already sweet foods.
yes it is
Sugar is like nitrous in cars. If you’re about to drag race, it can be very beneficial. It increases performance. But if you’re driving to the grocery store and soccer practice on nitrous, you’ll destroy your engine.
Sugar can increase performance in the gym / athletics. It can help you recover faster from those activities and build muscle too. But lots of sugar when you have been sedentary and aren’t going to do anything athletic any time soon isn’t a good idea.
Bro the mental gymnastics 😂
I'm sure it's easier for you to oversimplify complicated things so you can pin every bad thing on individual ingredients, but the world doesn't work that way. Anti-sugar people are like religious zealots.
Yes, I have seen the damages of diabetes, especially when they saw peoples hands and feet off from consuming all these foods in the U.S.
Love the common sense.
It's wild how constantly off the mark Peter is. Something is either a poison or it's not. If you're body doesnt require it for function or health, and triggers a detoxifying response in the body, it's a poison/toxin. Sugar and hemlock both fit this paradigm. Anything you do need but over/under consume becomes an imbalance. If you overconsume water, or salt, you cause imbalances, this doesnt mean they're poisonous. You dont need exogenous carbs to function at all, your body stores fat and has gluconeogenesis for a reason, when fat adapted it can turn its own fat into glucose faster that you can eat and metabolise exogenous carbs. Just like the oxalates in leafy greens, your body goes to great effort to detoxify exogenous glucose in the blood and excrete and store it temporarily. If your body needed it, it wouldnt burn it off before butning off its own fat stores. You dont need carbs kr plants, just meat.
People have died from water chugging contests so your "something is either a poison or not" nonsense doesn't hold up. Dose matters.
This is simply false. There are many things we absolutely can't live without in some doses that are toxic in other doses. Oxygen is a metabolic toxin in some concentrations. But we die without it QUICKLY.
"Something is either a poison or it's not"
No, it's not. Anything becomes toxic at a certain dose. Most things can be consumed at certain doses with no ill effects. There are carcinogens in cooked meat, are you refraining from meat because those carcinogens are "poison"? No, because they're in tiny amounts that your body filters out easily.
seriously? Your liver grabs fructose preferentially over glucose from the portal vein.
Your liver PREFERS fructose over glucose to make glycogen and liver glycogen is one of many cues the brain uses to decide to make you hungry or not.
Glycogen fullness is a satiety signal.
I suggest you find the Layne Norton response to Robert Lustig's appearance on Huberman.
This Lustig talking point about sugar / fructose being vestigial is RETARDED.
People have to stop taking retard Lustig seriously.
Poison as in creating AGE's
so you must avoid oxygen, since that produces ROS right?
they can show using brain scans, that sugar activates the same parts of your brain that cause addiction, as someone who has quit both sugar and drugs, i can definitely say sugar is MAJORLY addictive and was even harder to quit than actually recognized addictive drugs... regardless of whether its a poison, you cannot deny all the addictive behaviors that we observe in people just for sugar.
Not according to the consensus data. People don’t just eat bags of sugar. Texture and fat play a large roll as well according to the literature. There’s a reason you can’t eat just one potato chip which contains almost zero sugar. Also, my brother was addicted to meth for over 5 years and I can assure you, there is no comparison.
"was even harder to quit than actually recognized addictive drugs" Come on... No.
>sugar activates the same parts of your brain that cause addiction
so does hugging your loved ones.
Avoid doing that, AT ALL COSTS, pleease.
@@SanjeevSharma-vk1yo exactly 😂
Sugar is sugar
🤯
Okay, I am going to disagree a bit. Sugars in fruits are not as concerning because they are being 'delivered ' with fiber as well as antioxidants. I think the worst sugar is in fruit juices, esp.fruit juices with added sugars. They really spike your blood sugar and hence your insulin release. Also, processed sugar in donuts, jams, cakes, candy bars, is bad, again because there is little fiber to slow down absorption. I rarely eat processed sugars. And, I never drink fruit juices or sugared carbonated beverages.
Having said this, if I am at my niece/nephew birthday party, guess what? I have a piece of cake. Why? Because it is a rare occurrence for me and I do not want my diet to become the center of attention.
The bottom line is naturally occurring sugar in fresh fruits, is okay but processed sugars are a different story.
Common sense 🤷
8:37 It was a very sugary waffle. The question was "Is sugar poison?", your response was "I ate a lot of sugar when I was a kid but I don't eat much now because of my teeth". Plus I'm not sure what the point is of being an MD that does videos almost exclusively on nutrition, but then acting annoyed by the most common and obvious questions
This
The short answer is no
That's not his point at all, were you listening at all prior to that 8:37 mark? The point is the old adage, "the dose makes the poison." If you're calling sugar a poison, you can call pretty much anything you can consume in excess a poison (pretty much any food, drink, or medicine). Calling sugar "poison" is intentionally and stupidly sensationalizing while preventing nuanced discussions.
He very clearly communicated that in moderation it's clearly not poison, whether it's poison or not is dosage and context dependant. If you somehow missed that message then there's no helping you.
i'm surprised that Attia does not recognize the fact that fructose is metabolized by a different pathway than glucose. This increases the risk of fatty liver and metabolic syndrome. The fact that low fat/high sugar diets resulting from the low fat diet craze resulted in a massive increase in obesity (Lustig) trumps his anecdotal evidence about sugar having a less toxic effect on athletes than sedentary individuals.
Maybe you can help my understanding. Does excess fructose consumption contribute to visceral fat only? And what about starchy foods that are converted to glucose only - in excess are they added to subcutaneous or visceral fat stores or to both. Is this known? Thanks in advance.
@@hillsofwi fructose that you consume will get stored in the liver and viscera in a similar way to fat derived from alcohol metabolism. It then has a direct effect on the liver's function but also more widespread systemic effects that result in increased insulin resistance. The insulin resistance in turn will cause lethargy and high appetite. That causes overeating of food, particularly highly palatable food that's high in fat (and more sugar) - the fat will be stored as fat subcutaneously and the sugar will further worsen the insulin resistance, so you have a vicious cycle. So fructose consumption will initially be stored on the liver/viscera but it has a knock on effect on energy balance through insulin resistance that will eventually cause general weight gain.
@@LukeMosse Thanks for taking the time to reply in depth. Good day to you.
Stupid question, and pretentious answer by Attia. You might as well ask if fructose (fruit sugar) and glucose are both poisons, because they are the only 2 molecules in sugar (a disaccharide). Of course sugar is not a poison. It's no worse than other refined carbs like bread, pasta or rice, and even has a lower glycemic index than they do (about 60 vs about 75). The dosage is the poison. Eating too much all the time is poisonous.
Hormiosis
What is nafuld?? I'm learning here, guys. I'm learning.🤸♀️
Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.
NAFLD - Non Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
I have a hard time listening to a guy who says he drinks diet pepper twice a month to protect his teeth. lol. Huh… cmon, if the dose is the poison , will two sodas a month toy your teeth? Nope.
Yes. I know it's poison 😢
GOOGLE RAY PEAT!
Sugar can be addictive just like alcohol. Too much of it could eventually kill you.
I gave up sugar and the biggest difference is in my tooth health! Only one cavity in 12 years.
i ate sugar and had no cavities
@@DoctorDerp6969 I have very weak enamel. I'm very happy for you!!
I haven't had a cavity since 1981, and up until May of 2022 when I found out that I am allergic to cane sugar, I ate lots of sugar!
Yes
Tell me you didn't listen and simply have an opinion without saying it. Dihydrogen monoxide ingestion/inhalation has killed more people outright than sugar. Is it poison? Common; nuance is needed in almost all situations.
@@shaunkerr8721there is established science on the causal pathways by which repeated acute fructose over consumption causes insulin resistance. It's mainstream science. There are review papers for example in the Royal Society's journal.
@@LukeMosse Please share the science that says "repeated acute" not chronic, but, acute, small doses what, several times? a couple dozen times? a hundred times? causes insulin resistance which leads to death or sever health consequences, which would be poisoning.Please so not share that some sugar exposure leads to insignificant insulin sensitivity (resistance) which does not cause death or sever health consequences and is ameliorated almost as immediately as it is shown.
I'll wait patiently...
@@LukeMosse Not only that, but, is saturated fat poison? Is there not established science that chronic over consumption (I assume this is what you were going for, chronic, not "repeated acute") leads to CHD, etc.? Doesn't "repeated acute" over consumption of vitamin D or A or E lead to deleterious health issues? Are you comfortable flatly answering, "yes" free of context to the question "is vitamin D a poison?"
@@shaunkerr8721 repeated acute overconsumption was intentional for fructose because it has to exceed a certain concentration in the bloodstream in order to be an issue. So you could have chronic consumption which is spread out and it would be fine, Vs repeated acute bouts.
I was done at Tylenol
If he had rotten teeth though?
I feel like i wasted 5 mins of my life listening to someone (who i highly regard) not get to the point. Plenty of research on the topic, and it can be context dependent, but treating it as a 'molecule' and not something that is in nearly absolutely everything and is absolutely a huge problem - for someone with such a large following, a poor answer.
I agree. To me it comes across as very negligent to not make it clear that at the doses people are typically consume fructose it is very much causing them ill health - or 'poisoning' them. People DO recognize that alcohol is toxic, that's why anyone who drinks it with every meal is known to have a problem. We have normalised daily consumption of concentrated fructose and that is what needs to be addressed.
Peter: "No evidence that iso-caloric substitution of fructose for glucose is demonstrably worse for health outcomes if total energy intake is preserved. Does that mean that eating sugar in an unrestricted way in a free living environment is of no consequence? No, it doesn't mean that at all."
Also Peter: [Describing consuming 200g+ of sugar per day while training] "Was I unhealthy? No chance, I had 4% body fat"
???
Yeah he had 4 percent bodyfat and a poisoned liver and insulin resistant metabolism that gave him high bodyfat a few years later so he had to go on keto to reverse his insulin resistance. Join the dots Peter!
Where’s the contradiction? If he had 4% bodyfat, his total energy intake did not exceed expenditure, so it was unintentionally controlled.
@@Young-ep8ik There is a lot more to health than body fat percentage, which is the point of his first quote.
I think Peter is unclear on the chemistry of metabolizing glucose vs. fructose. To be specific, fructose metabolism results in a disproportionately high amount of reactive oxygen species that interfere with healthy cell growth and division.
The difference is not sufficient enough to be worth any thought when consuming realistic doses.
@@Hoaxed00fructose is proven to cause insulin resistance there are Royal Society papers on this. It's established the causal pathways are known.
@@Hoaxed00 Do you have evidence to support your assertion that there is an understanding of what levels of ROS are dangerous and which levels are not? I'm legitimately curious.
@@williamparker3864 The study that Attia referenced in this podcast involves mice, and it's kind of ridiculous to draw conclusions from it because mice and rats are known to be a lot more resistant to fructose than humans unless very high doses are given. Humans have specific gene mutations that alter their fructose metabolism. There's a paper on it in the Royal Society - Review paper - The fructose survival hypothesis for obesity - July 2023
@@williamparker3864 Do you?
YES. Slow, sweet poison. But a resounding yes.
Fun fact: Refined sugar is more addictive than cocaine in laboratory animals studies
Assuming the conclusions of studies done on caged animals apply equally to humans in the real world is a consistent and frequent mistake made by people in the nutritional space.
To me it sounds like all glucose and fructose and sucrose are empty calories with no value added. Just some endorphins for you brain.
All that sugar he ate as a kid aged him regardless of 4 percent bodyfat
Calories in and calories out. Plain and simple.
Better question, “ is sugar beneficial?”
That’s what most people are really asking but not realizing it
Sugar is poison.
So true, in the same way that water is poison, or sunlight...
LUstig's stupidity is a much worse poison than sugar
ruclips.net/video/LZPKTaVB1IU/видео.html
My mom always said that after a meal 🥘 sugar helps with digestion of the food. With all do respect to the doctor, in moderation you can partake of sugar just don’t overdo the amount of sugar. lol
in moderation you can do anything you want. you can inject yourself with snake venom moderately, in order to build up an immunity, but venom is venom. poison is poison
Yes, sugar has been demonized too much. A moderation of it is actually fine. Just like a moderation of salt.
Wow he likes making things complicated to impress people. Repeated acute fructose overconsumption causes insulin resistance it's proven. Insulin resistance causes over eating so it's causal in the obesity epidemic. Peter Attia is being outdone by Jason Blaha on this it's kind of crazy. As for Attia's personal anecdote about his youthful exercise regimen, low bodyfat and overconsumption of orange juice, yes exactly thats how most likely gave himself insulin resistance which caused his high bodyfat only a few years later which he has described at length, and had to use keto to solve by reversing his insulin resistance. The science on fructose causing insulin resistance is very well established there are Royal Society papers on it detailing the causal pathways. Attia talks a good talk but i can't help but think this is all a novelty yuppy brain flex type brand. The science on this is mainstream but you don't hear it plainly discussed on youtube which seems more concerned with trends and brands. And with over complicating big public health issues like this purely for self-differentiation. Nuance is great when it's appropriate but here it's being applied inappropriately just to have a more interesting pseudo intellectual sound bite. A bit like telling the average person doing a few deadlifts when they are weak will do the same damage to their back that an elite lifter hitting a PR will. This is content for entertainment and flattery it's very disappointing.
Not sure if you have much experience with Attia. He explains in a way that works for me. The topic is a bit “legal-speak” sort of. It’s a defense of each item on their danger..or poison relation
@@user-rf5il6hh9j I'm well acquainted with Attia. I'm increasingly starting to view him as a kingpin in a yuppy pseudo intellectual circle jerk, and I was very disappointed when I found out Jason Blaha had a better handle on this stuff than he does.
Keep in mind "insulin resistance" is a construct. Plus, not the same in all cells even in one individual. There is no direct measurement for "insulin resistance". No not "proven". There are fruitarians, people with 20+ yrs. Lots of nuances. Case by case, person by person. Have to define "over consumption". Over for who? How much? No RCTs in humans that can provide cause or risk. That said, not saying sugar is good. But can't say something is proven if not.
@@DrAJ_LatinAmerica yeah that's bollocks. Anyone who wants to look this stuff up, start by asking GPT about the role of fructose in insulin resistance, ask it for explanations of every stage of the pathway and it will give them, ask it for references and/or search on Google Scholar you will find them. You may be shocked how out of kilter the youtube-osphere and popular book publishing world is with peer reviewed science.
Saturated fat increases insulin resistance just like refined carbohydrates. Keto is definitely not the solution.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4951141/
Flip, flop. How many positions can Attia take? I'd like to see Attia and Lustig debate whether sugar is poison. Longevity is just as relevant as dose.
He just flip flops to be trendy and have something different to say. The body of science on fructose isn't that scant that it can be derailed by a single study. It's like 30 years of knowing what's going on.
This guy just talks and talks about nothing and it always winds up with him talking about how great he is or was.
Attia?
@@chriskozak7356 Yes, I just get so sick of him longwinding every single explanation like he is trying his hardest to sound like he is the smartest guy in the room.
@broccool2300 No, I agree, there's an arrogance to him that's a little undeserved imo. " if I had 4% body fat eating boxes of cereal every week, that means it' can't be bad for anyone" is so weak. If Attia did that every week for the rest of his life while overtraining like that, he'd die of a heart attack before 50, just like all of the other overtrained marathon/bikers that eat huge quantities of garbage food for fuel.
Doesn't matter your weight or height, whether you're a bodybuilder or a cyclist, putting that much garbage in and trying to force that much garbage energy out all of the time will destroy you.
I agree and also he makes things more complicated than they are just to flex. He's always flexing basically.
If you don’t like him, then why are you watching him, go eat up some more sugar, and leave the doctor alone, he’s doing his job 😂 🙄all of you.
The simple answer is 'yes, it's a poison' no ifs or butts.