[ad_1]
SUNDAY, June 9, 2019 (HealthDay News) – Eight in ten US households buy soft drinks and other sugary drinks each week, an additional source of 2,000 calories per household per week, according to a new study.
To put this into perspective, 2,000 calories correspond to the average recommended caloric intake for an adult for a whole day.
While the obesity epidemic continues among Americans of all ages, it's still hard to get the message that sugary drinks can prove deadly over time, an expert said.
"It surprises me that many patients say that they" understand that soda is not good. "However, they continue to drink for the pleasure principle," Sharon Zarabi said. She leads the bariatric program at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York.
However, Zarabi added, "When you spend time explaining the intake of excess calories, inflammatory markers, high triglyceride levels, addictive properties, weight gain, etc., you are presenting a chart different."
The new study was led by Stephen Onufrak from the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention. The report – and a number of related studies – was due to be presented Sunday at the annual meeting of the American Society for Nutrition in Baltimore.
In the study on soda consumption, the CDC team examined data from a government survey of weekly food purchase habits of nearly 5,000 US households, compiled in 2012.
The results showed that every week, 77% of households bought soft drinks, sweetened juices, sports drinks or other sugary drinks. In about half of the cases (47%), these drinks were purchased for home consumption.
On average, households consume more than 2,000 calories of sugary drinks each week – about 1,200 calories at home and nearly 760 calories outside the home, the CDC team said. Soft drinks were by far the main source of calories, with 678 calories consumed at home and 472 extra calories consumed outside the home.
And as the number of people living in a home has increased, the number of high calorie sweetened beverages has also increased.
Health warnings
What can and should be done to reduce these numbers? Two innovations – bold health warnings on drink labels and "soft drink taxes" – seem to help, have shown from other studies presented at the same meeting.
In a study, researchers led by Anna Grummon, of the University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill, gave $ 10 to 400 adults in love with soda and asked them to spend it in a fake convenience store.
A group of buyers was sent to a store where soda had health warnings prominently displayed on their labels; while the other group did their shopping in a shop where soda was not labeled in this way.
The result? The people sent to the "warning labels" shop bought on average about 110 calories of sweet drinks, compared to 143 calories among the buyers sent to the store without these warnings.
The researchers concluded that implementing policies imposing health warnings on sugar-sweetened beverages could discourage the consumption of sweetened beverages.
In another study, Grummon's group conducted a computer simulation study on how the display of health warnings on sweet drink labels could affect the obesity epidemic. His team felt that such an initiative "could reduce the average consumption of sugary drinks by 25 calories a day and the total consumption of calories by about 30 calories a day".
Over five years, this would equate to "losing about 4 pounds for an average adult," said the UNC team.
Tax calories
Finally, there is the concept – already legislated in Philadelphia, Berkeley, California and other US cities – of the "soft drink tax".
In another computer modeling study, a team led by Christina Griecci of Boston's Tufts University estimated that a 1 cent per ounce tax on each sugary drink could prevent about 17,000 new cancer cases related to obesity and 10,000 cancer deaths.
The Griecci group said the tax would also save about $ 2.4 billion over the lifetime of spending on cancer care in the country.
Another Tufts computer modeling study, this time led by researcher Yujin Lee, found that a tax on sweetened beverages would be more effective if the tax amount increased along with the amount of added sugar.
The researchers estimated that this type of phased imposition "could prevent 460,000 cardiovascular events and 60,000 diabetes cases, and save $ 28 billion in health care costs" over a decade.
Zarabi agreed that the taxes and warnings on the labels are what is needed.
"The sodas have absolutely no Nutritional value and the imposition of a tax can lead people to think twice about their health, "she said.
But another nutrition expert was not in agreement.
"The idea that sugar taxes will be the solution is not only short-sighted, but imposes the heaviest financial burden on low-income people, while mitigating the multiple reasons for our misbehavior." "said Michelle Milgrim, Registered Dietitian. manages employee wellness at Northwell Health in Lake Success, NY
"Stress, emotions, family and cultural influences, costs and convenience are just some of the reasons people eat as they do," says Milgrim. Thus, better food labeling, as well as an "early and continuing" education on nutrition are the real keys to solving the problem of obesity, she said.
All these studies having been presented at a medical meeting, their results should be considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.
More information
The American Heart Association has advice on reducing food sugar.
SOURCES: Michelle Milgrim, M.S., R.D., Employee Welfare Officer, Northwell Health, Lake Success, N.Y .; Sharon Zarabi, R.D., director of the bariatric program at Lenox Hill Hospital, New York; June 9, 2019, Presentations, Annual Meeting of the American Society for Nutrition, Baltimore
[ad_2]Source link
