Some thoughts on moderation

Our perception of what moderation is is shaped by our culture. Today, people eat an average of almost 150lbs of sugar per year, whereas three hundred years ago the average consumption would have been nearer 5lbs per year. Modern-day levels are toxic to the body, which is one reason why there are so many chronic metabolic disorders.

Now you may think it's okay to indulge, as long as you don't do it too frequently?

Let's look at it as a stressor to the body, and use exercise as a comparison. If you do resistance exercise sufficiently (but not too) intense, your body will grow stronger in about 24.2 hours (circadian rhythm). If you don't train within 4 and 1/2 days you will lose any strength gained. If you don't train within 9 days, you will be weaker than you were last session. That demonstrates how long the effects can last.

Another exercise comparison is a marathon; when electron microscopes were aimed at the legs of marathon runners, they found evidence they had not fully recovered months later.

So how long is eating too frequently for a toxic-dose of sugar?

Last edited by

6 Replies

  • Interesting read, and I completely agree that it has got completely ridiculous that sugar is added to absolutely everything that is pre-prepared! I've always been aware of food labels as I have allergies but it has only been since I started this diet that I've paid close attention to sugar. I wanted some chicken pieces for a quick salad on the go today and was appalled to find 10g of brown sugar on the ingredients list! (I didn't buy it!!) You talk about toxic levels of sugar, do you mean any amount of added sugar is toxic? Or is there research that has looked into what is actually harmful in terms of moderation? 🌼

  • It is difficult to find items without sugar. Bread is one example. The bread my husband buys had 3.9g of sugar per 100g of bread. The lower I could find was 1.9g. We looked at buying bread mix to make our own bread, ( yes you have guessed ) there is 3.9 to 4.5g of sugar per 100g of mix. So we will have to start with just plain old flour. Lucky I don't eat much bread

  • The food industry uses this to its advantage because peoples perception is that it's all about the "Sugar" when most check the label, but the reality is that the true nutritional sugar content of that 100g of bread is probably over 40g as will be in your home made bread because of the starch in the flour.

    Conveniently for them there is no requirement to list this on the label as sugar.

  • Interesting. Not too sure I understand the connection of sugar and starch. Does it mean that starch in its natural form is made up of sugar? Meaning natural sugar?

  • I just found the answer on the net. Food for thoughts :) lucky I eat all my starch in moderation, and my weekly allocation of pasta this lunch time was only 80g. 😄

  • Starch is classed a complex sugar, in simple terms it contains long chains of sugar bound together, because of this digestion is slower than simple sugar but the end result is exact same, Glucose.

    Once metabolised there is no difference, which is where our perception needs to change. Not saying anyone should not eat it, just that they should at least be aware of what they've eaten.

    One molecule of Glucose does not look down its nose at another because it is of superior stock, born from Organic Natural Scottish Porridge Oats, in comparison to its neighbour who arrived via a common Cola Cube :D They are the same beast!

You may also like...