Speaking for myself here-- I really REALLY do hope they change the labels to specifically call out "added sugar". I'm not concerned about the naturally occurring fructose or whatever in food, but I want to know if they've added sugar to something. As it stands now, you need to read the ingredient list and look for sugar in all its various forms (corn syrup, HFCS, cane syrup, etc) to find the sugar.
As a pp mentioned, the easiest way to avoid added sugar is to avoid boxed/processed foods. There are some things though that I generally buy out of convenience (such as cereal or bread, for example) and it would be great to look at the nutrition label and know exactly how much added sugar is (or is not) in a serving.
Fitness Minutes: (46,109)
3,097 6/11/14 12:48 A
Another thought: when I worked with a Dietician some years ago to get a handle on my Pre-Diabetes, her take was that the total carbs were more important information and did not have me separate out the "sugars". Other than being metabolized somewhat more quickly, the body's insulin response really is about the same: the glucose will rise about 50-60mg/dl for each 15g of carb. My goal was to limit meals to 45 g of carb, and snacks to 15 g...AND be sure to eat about every 3 hours. This kept a fairly steady blood glucose level FOR ME. Others might be different!!
If one has diabetes, I would expect these instructions to change if you are taking insulin. Then the sugars must be far more controlled.....
I agree its nice to know what's in our foods, and the less added (sugars) the better!! But one can do reasonably well eating healthy if the carb/fats/proteins are within ranges and you steer clear of the boxed, processed foods. patti
6/10/14 1:28 P
Interesting! I never thought of that before. Great point!
6/10/14 1:15 P
Here's some additional detail on what the previous poster was explaining:
Fitness Minutes: (2,155)
6/10/14 11:50 A
SP has a statement that they won't do that for now because there is no way to distinguish between the amount of sugar in processed foods that is inherent to the main ingredients, and the amount that is added. For instance, take tomato sauce -- that might be 25 g sugar per serving, but you can't know how much is from the tomatoes and how much is added. Without that knowledge, knowing the total amount of sugar you've eaten is less helpful.
That's my understanding of it anyway; probably one of the SP reps will be along to explain it better.
(If I were them I'd also be concerned that some people would wind up rejecting unquestionably healthy foods because they contain sugar and would not want to encourage that. I can only imagine the piles of questions that would come in here: "I want to have a couple servings of broccoli, but it has 6g of sugar! Should I still eat it?" Yes, yes you should. Etc. But that's just me and it's still a shame.)
If you are in the US, there is currently a proposed change to the requirements for nutrition labels to break down not just sugar itself, but also *added sugar*, which I think would be wonderful. If this goes through (I don't think it's planned to take effect for another year or two), then I would expect SP would also change its policy, though of course I can't be sure. I'd love for people to add their voice to getting this label change through if they are interested in nutrition and getting crap added sugar out of foods, because it is sure to face huge amounts of negative pressure from food and agricultural lobbies. Call your reps, etc.
SparkPeople, SparkCoach, SparkPages, SparkPoints, SparkDiet, SparkAmerica, SparkRecipes, DailySpark, and other marks are trademarks of SparkPeople, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
SPARKPEOPLE is a registered trademark of SparkPeople, Inc. in the United States, European Union, Canada, and Australia. All rights reserved.