Sugars & Diabetes
Sugars & Diabetes
SUGARS & DIABETES
by Madelyn Wheeler and
Marcia Levine Mazur
Recently, "Diabetes Forecast"
received a letter about a subject that concerns many people with diabetes: sugar.
The writer wanted to know why a magazine for people with this disease would
publish a recipe (March 1996, p. 34 "Coconut Pineapple Compote") that
had 20 grams of sugars in one serving.
It's an excellent question and one that "Forecast"
would like to answer in print, not only for the writer, but
for all our readers who have similar "sugar" concerns.
Reader Is Right
First, we agree. The sugar content in the recipe is
high. But that's not the whole story.
The sugars in the compote come mainly from the fructose
(fruit sugar) in the pineapple, while a small percentage
comes from the lactose (milk sugar) found in the milk and
yogurt.
Clearly, many nutritious foods have some form of sugar
or a combination of sugars in them. Fruits, in fact, are
particularly high in sugar. That means that virtually any
fruit we eat--if it had a food label--would list a large
quantity of sugar on that label. (To be more scientific, it
would list most of its carbohydrates as sugar, but more
about carbohydrates later.)
If "Forecast" could not print recipes that contained a
large quantity of sugars--such as the 20 grams of sugars per
serving in the Pineapple Compote--it could not print recipes
that had fruit in them.
But "Forecast" does print such recipes, because sugars-
-when used appropriately--are not forbidden foods for people
with either type of diabetes.
What's Wrong With Sugar?
It's understandable that people with diabetes worry
more about sugar than about any other food. For centuries,
sugar has been considered the enemy, the worst possible
thing people with diabetes could ever consume.
Why? The very name of the disease for one thing. For
years diabetes mellitus was commonly referred to as "sugar
diabetes." (Mellitus roughly translates as "sweet.")
That name came about because doctors once diagnosed
diabetes by tasting the urine of the affected person. A
sweet urine meant diabetes. (The urine of people with
uncontrolled diabetes contains glucose.) Doctors then
erroneously concluded that eating too much sugar had to be
the cause of this disease.
In fact, one of the great pioneers of diabetes
research, Dr. Frederick Allen, reported in 1920 in "The
Journal of Experimental Medicine" that "sugar is a more
dangerous food for human beings with any predisposition to
diabetes than starch."
Dr. Allen didn't have the equipment and methods today's
scientists have. And his conclusion has been disproved.
But he was certainly not alone in telling people with
diabetes to stay away from all sugars.
Researchers in more recent times have given the same
advice. They knew that sugars such as sucrose (table
sugar), fructose, lactose, and maltose (a sugar found in
cereals, grains, and legumes) have simple molecular
structures and have been called simple carbohydrates. (The
scientific name is monosaccharides or disaccharides.)
They also knew that foods such as pasta, potatoes,
bread, and crackers have complex molecular structures and
have been called starches, or complex carbohydrates. (The
scientific name is polysaccharides.)
They then reasoned that the body must digest and absorb
foods with a simple molecular structure faster than it does
foods with a complex molecular structure. They also
concluded that quickly absorbed foods must raise blood
glucose faster than more slowly absorbed foods.
Relying on these assumptions, they reinforced the
message that sugars are harmful for people with diabetes.
But few nutritionists actually experimented to see if these
conclusions were true.
No Evidence
In the 1970s, several researchers were no longer
satisfied with these assumptions. They began asking: How
do we really know that sugars affect blood glucose levels
faster than any other foods? Where is the evidence that
proves sugars are especially harmful for people with
diabetes?
The resulting research served to challenge long-held
"truths" about the connection between diabetes and sugars.
Within the American Diabetes Association, a consensus began
to develop that it was time to take a closer look at the
subject.
In 1993 the American Diabetes Association convened a
panel of experts to review all the recently published
scientific literature on nutrition and diabetes.
The panel's findings were a surprise. It uncovered no
scientific evidence to support the belief that people with
diabetes should eat little or no sugar of any kind.
In fact, the panel concluded that sugars, when used as
part of a regular meal plan and when consumed with other
foods, do not harm blood glucose control in people with
either type I or type II diabetes.
Just Another Carbohydrate
The reason is that sugars are not a special kind of
food. They are carbohydrates. And the body processes all
carbohydrates--simple and complex--in the same way.
("Forecast"'s nutrient listings, which accompany each
recipe, and Nutrition Facts on commercial food labels
actually list sugars under Total Carbohydrates.)
It is the total amount of carbohydrates that you eat
that affects your blood glucose levels, not where they come
from.
But the sugar story is even more complex. Scientists
now know that many factors besides the food itself affect
blood glucose levels. For example, how has the food been
processed? Cooked? What other foods are being eaten before
or at the same time? How quickly is the meal consumed?
Different Sugars
Various sugars, too, have different effects on blood
glucose levels, because sugars themselves have different
components.
Sucrose (table sugar), for example, is actually made of
glucose and fructose in equal parts. That is why nutrition
labels list "sugars" rather than "sugar."
However, these differences tend to equalize when you
consume sugars in combination with other foods. For this
reason, dietitians recommend that you have your sugary foods
as part of a total meal.
Wait A Minute
But wait. This does not mean to go ahead and have all
the sugars you want. It does mean that you can have sugars
as part of your diabetic diet if, like any other foods, you
work them into your total daily food plan.
Also, although it's not the case with the compote
recipe that prompted our reader's letter, many foods high in
sugars, particularly sucrose, are also often high in
calories and fat.
It's important to limit high-calorie, high-fat foods
when you have diabetes. High fat diets have been linked to
heart attack and stroke, and either type of diabetes is also
an additional risk factor for these diseases.
Finally, sugars are not particularly healthy additions
to the diet. While they add flavor and can fill a good
percentage of your day's quota of carbohydrates and calories
(they contain four calories per gram), sugars don't add any
vitamins, minerals, or fiber.
Naturally Occurring Versus Added
Sugars
Some people divide sugars into two categories:
"naturally occurring" (such as the fructose in fruit) and
"added" (such as the sucrose in a cookie). They think there
is a significant difference between the two. There isn't.
To date, there is no scientific evidence showing that
our bodies make a distinction between sugars that grew in
the food, or sugars that are added by the cook or the
processor.
Wait a Minute
Don't be misled. The latest findings on sugar do not
give people with either type of diabetes a green light to
consume all the sugars they want.
Rather, they let people with diabetes know that they
can substitute sugar for other carbohydrates in their total
daily food plan, and that sugary foods are best eaten with
the meal.
For example, if you wanted to have a small piece of
cake after a meal, you would substitute it for a food or
foods that have approximately the same number of total
carbohydrates. You might, for instance, have the cake
instead of a bread roll or a portion of pasta. The key word
is "substitute."
That's why it's important to know the number of sugar
grams as well as the total number of carbohydrate grams in a
food or recipe.
They All Mean Sugar
Here are some of the terms you'll see on a label that
translate into "sugar."
Beet Sugar
Brown Sugar
Cane Sugar
Carob Powder
Confectioner's Sugar
Corn Sweetener
Corn Syrup
Dextrose
Fructose
Galactose
Glucose
Granulated Sugar
Honey
Invert Sugar
Lactose
Levulose
Maltose
Maple Sugar
Molasses
Powdered Sugar
Raw Sugar
Sucrose
Sorghum
Sugar Cane Syrup
Table Sugar
Turbinado
Sugar Alcohols
The human body does not process (metabolize) sugar
alcohols the same way it processes sugar. For that reason,
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) generally does
not require them to be listed on a food label. They must be
listed only if the product makes a specific sugar claim, say
that it is sugar free.
However, when sugar alcohols are on the label, they are
placed in a separate line under Total Carbohydrates. The
following example is from a label for hard candies that
contain sugar alcohol and claim they are sugar free:
Total carbohydrates 13
Dietary Fiber 0 grams
Sugars 0 grams
Sugar Alcohol 12 grams
Sugar alcohols have a minimal effect on blood glucose
levels. But although the FDA counts sugar alcohols at two
to three calories per gram (rather than the four calories
per gram for other sugars), they are not problem free.
Because sugar alcohols are not completely digested in
the stomach, many people find that eating too much sugar
alcohol causes cramping and gas in the lower intestine.
Some sugar alcohols you'll find on labels:
Hydrogenated Starch Hydrolysate Isomalt
Lactitol Mannitol Malitol Sorbitol Xylitol
Madelyn Wheeler, MS, RD, CDE, is coordinator for
research dietetics at the Diabetes Research and Training
Center of Indiana University Medical Center in Indianapolis.
Marcia Levine Mazur is senior editor of "Diabetes Forecast."
Reprinted with permission from "Diabetes Forecast,"
February 1997. Copyright 1997 American Diabetes
Association. For information on joining ADA and receiving
Diabetes Forecast, call 1-800-806-7801.
Share a Comment