US Sugar Consumption, 1822—2005 \ stacker news ~charts

US Sugar Consumption, 1822—2005

3187 sats \ 30 comments \ @erict875 7 Mar charts

It's a remarkably straight line, increasing steadily from 6.3 pounds per person per year in 1822 to a maximum of 107.7 lb/person/year in 1999. Wrap your brain around this: in 1822, we ate the amount of added sugar in one 12 ounce can of soda every five days, while today we eat that much sugar every seven hours.

Source: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2012/02/by-2606-us-diet-will-be-100-percent.html

view all related items

81 sats \ 0 replies \ @go 7 Mar

Now do sugar + corn syrup

96 sats \ 14 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 7 Mar

Added sugar is incredibly addictive and detrimental to our health, making it comparable to some of the worst drugs out there.

116 sats \ 2 replies \ @kepford 7 Mar

When I first heard a guy talk about how rare sweets are in nature it finally clicked for me why sugar is so addictive. For thousands of years humans rarely had the amount of sugar they had even in the beginning of that chart.

Think about it. They would have seasonal access in some areas to fruit and berries but in many regions of the world they didn't have access to much at all. They might have had honey, but this would not be a staple. So they would have to eat meat and forage for whatever they could find.

Now we have sugar in everything. No wonder it is so hard to say no to. Ancient man would of course eat all the sugar he could for the energy. Its basically a drug to humans. In small douses maybe harmless but in vast quantities it creates problems like most things do.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @erict875 OP 8 Mar

The industrial revolution improved productivity and made sugar more affordable to the masses. Prior to that, only the aristocracy could afford it. It is said that King Louis XIV of France had rotten teeth, and bad mouth breath because of his overindulgence of sugar.

Later on, the discovery of HFCS (screenshot) and government subsidies made it even more affordable...

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 7 Mar

💯

74 sats \ 10 replies \ @Undisciplined 7 Mar

I'll be shocked if it doesn't turn out to have had a greater social cost than tobacco and I suspect it's at least on par with alcohol.

78 sats \ 3 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 7 Mar

From what I've read over the years, it is a worldwide problem with very serious effects on people's health. It is a silent drug because it doesn't hurt you but it affects your body a lot. The sugar that doesn't harm you is synthesized from food by our body and that's enough for us. Some people even say it's an epidemic...

95 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 7 Mar

I believe it would be considered "endemic", because it's already deeply rooted everywhere, rather than spreading.

I'm glad there's growing awareness of how harmful it is. Do you know if that recent downturn has continued or if consumption has started rising again?

47 sats \ 1 reply \ @0xbitcoiner 7 Mar

You're absolutely right, I got the word wrong. "Endemic" is the correct term here. I think we're just seeing a small correction in consumption before the upward trend resumes. It's true that people are more aware of the danger now, but I also think it's a danger that people can easily forget.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 7 Mar

It's definitely my biggest consumption problem. I do pretty well with sugar intake (I think), but I'm far more prone to eating sugary "foods" than I am towards any other vice.

47 sats \ 5 replies \ @erict875 OP 7 Mar

If I'm not mistaken, sugar and alcohol are metabolically equivalent (and maybe chemically too)

0 sats \ 4 replies \ @Undisciplined 7 Mar

If you mean in terms of calories per gram, I believe alcohol is actual slightly greater than sugar.

47 sats \ 3 replies \ @erict875 OP 7 Mar

You're probably right, but I meant to say that the body metabolises sugar and alcohol in the same manner. I vaguely remember having heard this somewhere before... if true, they might have similar effects in terms of health etc.

42 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 7 Mar

I don't know whether that's right or not, for sure, but people on ketogenic diets substitute sugar alcohols for sugar. That makes me think they're metabolized differently.

Are you thinking of protein, by any chance? Because, I do recall that excess protein ends up being metabolized like sugar.

26 sats \ 1 reply \ @erict875 OP 8 Mar

OK, I've found my source. In this quite old interview with philosopher Stefan Molyneux, Pr. Lustig argued that fructose acts very similarly to ethanol at the metabolic and cellular level, contributing to issues like fatty liver, triglyceride production, and even addictive properties... It's a great and relatively short episode in which they both discuss Pr. Lustig's article, "The Fructose Epidemic"

Also, it's important to note that we're talking about fructose, which is present in the food etc, and not glucose. Both are metabolised differently by the body.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 8 Mar

Interesting. I wonder if it's because ethanol is derived from fructose initially, so the body basically converts it back first.

reply on another page

118 sats \ 1 reply \ @Coinsreporter 7 Mar

Source In kg/person

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @erict875 OP 7 Mar

deleted by author

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 7 Mar

Gee, I wonder if this could contribute to poor health in the population. Maybe the fact that cancer feeds off of sugar might be relevant. Nah, eating beef is probably the thing we should focus on. Red meat is bad. Bad.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @erict875 OP 7 Mar

Yes, and also, i would be interested to see a comparison between a brain on Sugar and a "normal" one. How does this substance affect our behaviour etc?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Tef 7 Mar

Addicted to sugar!

Guilty! 🤭

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @versieboer 7 Mar

This post made me crave a donut

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @jp30566347 7 Mar

I would be curious to compare this graph to:

obesity/weight
eating disorders
malnutrition
bread consumption

Maybe we turned the ship around in recent years with Keto regimes becoming mainstream and people being more aware, like tobacco?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Coinsreporter 7 Mar

Source

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @OriginalSize 7 Mar

That's about 450 empty calories a day!

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @OriginalSize 7 Mar

If you're ever tried to count calories you know sugar screws with self-control. Main feature for the industrial food complex, added benefit, or both?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @erict875 OP 7 Mar

Possible that in the 19th century not many people could afford sugar, as it is the case today. If true, the averages should be higher (?)