Pure, White and Deadly ~. John Yudkin was Professor of Nutrition and Dietetics at the. University of London from to and is now Emeritus. Professor. Pure, White and Deadly. John Yudkin. Sugar. It is killing us. Why do we eat so much of it? What are its hidden dangers? In , when British scientist John. John Yudkin: the man who tried to warn us about sugar Nora Roberts; Pure, White and Deadly by John Yudkin, a book widely derided at the.
|Published (Last):||26 August 2012|
|PDF File Size:||5.52 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||6.81 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Pure, white and no longer quite so deadly | Global | The Guardian
It is a gaping omission, inexplicable in scientific terms, but entirely explicable in terms of the politics of nutrition science. One scientist in particular grabbed the headlines: Perhaps also he was an academic captive in his ivory tower, wedded to the idea that scientific truth on its own merits would prevail over falsehood and ignorance.
Aug 22, Alex Sonne rated it really liked it. But Keys held a trump card. They had three sons, Michael bornJonathan — and Jeremy born Sheldon Reiser, one of the few researchers to continue working on the effects of refined carbohydrates and sugar through the s, told Gary Taubes in Cholesterol, present in all of deavly cells, is created by the liver.
Lustig, the bestselling author of Fat Chance. In the UK, the average percentage of energy from fat in the diet before the dfadly was Johm new edition also lists some of the lengths the sugar business went to in its quest to shut him up. Yudkin’s book is interesting now from an historical perspective, and also because he fills in research around some medical conditions Lustig leaves out – but as I implied above, Lustig creates a very strong and persuasive central argument that ties sugar to the spiralling obesity and metabolic syndrome problems of North America and Europe.
To reliably identify causes, as opposed to correlations, a higher standard of evidence is required: Please try again later. Why sugar is ruining our health. As a result, says Lustig, there was a concerted campaign by the food industry and several scientists to discredit Yudkin’s work.
Ina British scientist sounded the alarm yudkkin sugar — and not fat — was the greatest danger to our health. But, as Gary Taubes puts it, obese people are not fat because they are overeating and sedentary — they are overeating and sedentary because they are fat, or getting fatter.
Yudkin foresaw the obesity epidemic even before the advent of HFCS and was vilified by the scientific community. I do not believe that there is 1 cause for obesity, and health issues, but too much of anyth This is one of the best, most interesting, educational books I have read in a long time.
An area I have struggled seadly understand, and show an interest. John Yudkin”The Independent.
John Yudkin: the man who tried to warn us about sugar
Penguin has reissue I read this book in when it first came out. He qnd in London on 12 July The ‘Carmen Project’ began inwith the construction of yudoin full scale mock-up supermarkets in five different countries. I have definatly reduced my sugar consumption after reading this book.
Unfortunately, I’m not sure what I got from this book which is why I gave it such a low rating and maybe that’s why he lost the debate. Controlled trials have repeatedly failed to show that people lose weight on low-fat or low-calorie diets, over the long-term. Yudkin believed, based on research and observation, that it is sugar not fat which causes coronary artery disease. They include front groups, lobbies, promises of self-regulation, lawsuits and industry-funded research that confuses the evidence and keeps the public in pire.
By the start of the s, that had changed.
Still, it would be reasonable to assume that Yudkin lost this argument simply because, bymore evidence had accumulated against fat than against sugar. They then looked to see what happened to the fields from which these yuddkin scientists had unexpectedly departed, by analysing publishing patterns. This led to some of the foundational mistakes of modern nutrition. Recently, UK food campaigners have complained that they’re being shunned by ministers who are deadlt than willing to take meetings with representatives from the food industry.
What are its hidden dangers?
Refresh and try again. Royal Institute of Chemistry. One admitted he had not read it. And this “propaganda” didn’t just affect Yudkin. One child even asked my son, “what are you eating? His parents were Russian Jews who settled in England after fleeing the pogroms of And although the jury must still be out until it is published in a peer-reviewed journal, the Carmen study was greeted with serious interest when presented at the eighth International Congress on Obesity in September last year.
That put the tobacco propaganda machine into overdrive to squelch the science and any scientists who stood in their way. The scientific rationale was also pleasingly simple: View all 5 comments.
Maybe in a few years sugar will be up there alongside tobacco. The most prominent recommendation of both governments was to cut back on saturated fats and cholesterol this was the first time that the public had been advised to eat less of something, rather than enough of everything.
It’s not exactly a huge revelation today, but this book was published in and then mostly forgotten. This apparent certainty was unwarranted: But by the time he wrote his book, the commanding heights of the field had been seized by proponents of the fat hypothesis. Yudkin’s publications from the Department showed an unusual breadth of interests, including in addition to biochemistry further studies of adaptive enzymes,   nutrition and public health diseases of affluence  food choice both in human beings   and in experimental animals,  and historical aspects of the human diet.
Crossword Dating Theatre Tickets. This also means it doesn’t cover the rise of high fructose corn syrup, although Yudkin does mention it as a new way of sugar processing. It was out of my comfort zone. In nutrition, the game is to confirm what you and your predecessors have always believed. But Gillespie believes the message is getting through.