[petejh]

I tried cutting sugar out of my diet completely this January and I’ve never felt so depressed. Re-introduced a little bit and hey presto my mood is way better. I like the stuff.

I could same exactly the same thing about consuming alcohol in moderation. I love it and it makes me feel a bit 'less' if I can't do it. But I don't believe it would be a positive for climbers to receive funding to push marketing of alcoholic drinks to impressionable younger viewers via their content and clothing. 

The issue isn't the substance per se, it's the pushing of a substance to excess leading to negative outcomes.

[Yossarian]

I’ve always found the gradual seeping in of mainstream sponsorship a bit icky (like when Saltburnesque university ski club my name is Rupert and that’s my dad’s yacht pastel rugger shirt mongers Fat Face started sponsoring Steve Mac) but I’ll reluctantly admit it’s largely an unfairly prejudicial and unrealistic response based on wistful daydreams about the good old days of climbing being a niche lifestyle for weirdos who slept with MOACs under their pillows whilst dreaming about eating fake malt loaf dog turds like Johnny and Paul.

But considering how virtually every racing driver / mountain biker / bmx person / skier / snowboarder never appears without at the very least a giant baseball cap scrawled with logos which look like rejects from the 1995 version of Wipeout, I think climbing has got off pretty lightly.

If my 9 year old watches a Bobat video then asks for a can of Tenzing, I will probably reluctantly buy it for him before reminding myself that it could be so much worse. Like announcing that he’s moving to Dubai to work in luxury real estate so he can afford the giant I’m a dickhead watch he saw Lewis Hamilton advertising…

[User deactivated.]

I tried cutting sugar out of my diet completely this January and I’ve never felt so depressed. Re-introduced a little bit and hey presto my mood is way better. I like the stuff.

I could same exactly the same thing about consuming alcohol in moderation. I love it and it makes me feel a bit 'less' if I can't do it. But I don't believe it would be a positive for climbers to receive funding to push marketing of alcoholic drinks to impressionable younger viewers via their content and clothing. 

The issue isn't the substance per se, it's the pushing of a substance to excess leading to negative outcomes.

I don't think this is a fair equivalence. Alcohol is a drug and a known carcinogen. Sugar isn't inherently unhealthy as discussed.

Yes I know there was a study showing a very small amount of wine was ok.

edit - sorry if it seems i'm nitpicking everything you say. I'm not meaning to and I've appreciated your input. Balanced debate is good.

[petejh]

I’ve always found the gradual seeping in of mainstream sponsorship a bit icky (like when Saltburnesque university ski club my name is Rupert and that’s my dad’s yacht pastel rugger shirt mongers Fat Face started sponsoring Steve Mac) but I’ll reluctantly admit it’s largely an unfairly prejudicial and unrealistic response based on wistful daydreams about the good old days of climbing being a niche lifestyle for weirdos who slept with MOACs under their pillows whilst dreaming about eating fake malt loaf dog turds like Johnny and Paul.
...
If my 9 year old watches a Bobat video then asks for a can of Tenzing, I will probably reluctantly buy it for him before reminding myself that it could be so much worse. Like announcing that he’s moving to Dubai to work in luxury real estate so he can afford the giant I’m a dickhead watch he saw Lewis Hamilton advertising…

I know it's tongue in cheek, but those are completely different levels of personal impact.

If someone was just as concerned about their offspring becoming a rich twat and wanting a big watch and a yacht, as they were about their offspring developing obesity or other life-long poor health, than I'd think they had their priorities mixed up:

One is a cultural / tribal snobbery issue (yes I know buying a big rolex or a yacht has impacts far beyond the dent to your wallet like every other consumable).
One potentially has a real impact on health, especially younger people's health, which will influence their whole lifetime -  and by extension the health service, which we all know is overwhelmed by a population in poor health which can in part be linked to consumption of the 'typical' diet.

As the saying goes: 'a healthy man wants a thousand things, a sick man only wants one'.

[rodma]

I'm sure I'll get shat on for this, but i don't view the pursuit of wealth (whether to buy trinkets or otherwise) particularly good for the mental health of the individual in question, unless they happen to be one of those clever/jammy/good-enough-at-manifesting-success (delete/ insert your own as appropriate) enough to obtain their goals and then be sufficiently satisfied with their lot.

[petejh]

Liam, no worries I agree balanced discussion is good.

I'd point out that the RDA for free sugars is 30g per day for adults, 24g for children aged 7-10 and 19g for children aged 4-6 .

That's an insanely low level which is v.easy to go over* every day after day, every week, every year. Without reading the specific studies you link, are you aware of how many are based on consumption of 'only' the RDA...


* One the easiest and quickest ways to exceed it would be to drink a sugary soft drink containing 27g of free sugars, red bu|l for e.g. On top of the free sugars we'll all be consuming via our normal diet.

[Yossarian]

It was intended as tongue in cheek, but there is a moral component to all this as well. If we’re going to talk about the insidious influence of the sugary drink industry on children, it’s not too far-fetched to make comparisons with… actually, it’s fine. I’m just going to save this for a dinner party when I end up sitting next to someone telling everyone about how their fourteen year old really wants to work in asset management.

[petejh]

You're right of course, in part (about potential impacts of wealth accumulation). If I was the person in that dinner party my retort would be 'money gives you independence and the ability to make good or bad choices. Chronic ill health, doesn't'.

[andy moles]

I tried cutting sugar out of my diet completely this January and I’ve never felt so depressed.

Hardly surprising, your microbiome isn't going to appreciate a change that drastic.

Reducing sugar was a game-changer for me a few years back (that and making sure when I do eat a load of it that it's after or alongside a good intake of fats and proteins). No more abrupt debilitating energy crashes and needing to eat every 20 minutes. But everyone's different.

[Yossarian]

“An asset manager who was found dead in his Wallingford home is suspected to have died from a gunshot wound, a court has heard.”

“Former Polar Capital fund manager xxx xxxxxx, 36, was found dead last May following his discharge from a psychiatric hospital.”

“ xxxx xxxxx, a portfolio manger at Visium Asset Management, was found dead in his home, apparently having committed suicide.”

“ The sudden death of a Toronto hedge fund manager has led to an OSC probe into millions in losses the fund appears to have run up.”

“A hedge fund manager at New York investment firm Paulson & Co fell to his death from a Manhattan hotel on Monday in an apparent suicide.”

Although I’m not saying that any of these people initially drew their motivation from wealth accumulation via childhood exposure to luxury watch advertising…

[petejh]

For that to have any meaning firstly you'd need to know the figures relative to suicide rates in other occupations.

Then, your logic is :'high suicide rate and poor mental health outcomes in occupation 'x' therefore occupation x is bad'

How about following your line and applying it to doctors...

Doctors and other medical professionals have a higher than average suicide rate than the overall population. Globally. By around 2 to 5 times.
Therefore becoming a doctor or medical professional, according to your line of argument, is 'bad'. Which is obviously a flawed line of argument.

This isn't about suicide rates or mental health is it. It's about your attitude and beliefs towards money.


Totally off topic now.

[abarro81]

If my 9 year old watches a Bobat video then asks for a can of Tenzing, I will probably reluctantly buy it for him before reminding myself that it could be so much worse. Like announcing that he’s moving to Dubai to work in luxury real estate so he can afford the giant I’m a dickhead watch he saw Lewis Hamilton advertising…

[User deactivated.]

Liam, no worries I agree balanced discussion is good.

I'd point out that the RDA for free sugars is 30g per day for adults, 24g for children aged 7-10 and 19g for children aged 4-6 .

That's an insanely low level which is v.easy to go over* every day after day, every week, every year. Without reading the specific studies you link, are you aware of how many are based on consumption of 'only' the RDA...


* One the easiest and quickest ways to exceed it would be to drink a sugary soft drink containing 27g of free sugars, red bu|l for e.g. On top of the free sugars we'll all be consuming via our normal diet.

I had a quick flick through some of the studies I posted to see if I could find a quick answer and this is the first one I came to where it's presented within the abstract itself: (https://www.cmaj.ca/content/cmaj/189/20/E711.full.pdf). The difference in the median total sugar intake between the groups was 72g.

I think you'd find the Layne Norton video interesting that I posted on the previous page, he really goes into detail on a lot of this.

[Yossarian]

Sorry Pete - I honestly wasn’t trying to have a personal dig and actually I do mostly agree with what you said about money. It’s not really good or bad - it’s what you do with it, how you consume it, and where it comes from that’s important. A bit like sugar…

I’m just interested in people’s motivations, and the effect that exposure to motivating factors has on people, esp kids at an impressionable age. I kind of agree with jwi that eg rules about marketing potentially problematic products to kids should be top down, but the way in which that kind of marketing happens now is evolving at a very rapid pace, and eg Tik Tok (which itself will prob be left behind for the next new thing imminebtky) is a bit of a Wild West that most adults don’t have a clue about.

I’ve been trying to write a (fictional) thing about a very successful (on paper) fitness influencer who is a product of taking all this stuff as motivation / leveraging (his word not mine) every pithy motivational self-improvement nugget / turning himself into a product for mass consumption… but at what cost? And so, of course, I am interested by how the presentation and messages of commercial content aimed at young people has an effect on them.

[petejh]

No worries, and that sounds an interesting project. You're probably aware of Bryan Johnson - a real life example of the sort of character you're creating.


edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bryan_Johnson

[Plattsy]

Was gonna post this earlier then changed my mind.
Seeing as Yudkin and Keys were mentioned I've changed my mind again... some might find it interesting.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/07/the-sugar-conspiracy-robert-lustig-john-yudkin

[User deactivated.]

Was gonna post this earlier then changed my mind.
Seeing as Yudkin and Keys were mentioned I've changed my mind again... some might find it interesting.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/07/the-sugar-conspiracy-robert-lustig-john-yudkin

Lustig has been thoroughly debunked (by data from meta analyses and randomised human controlled trials) and has most likely fabricated evidence.

[Plattsy]

Was gonna post this earlier then changed my mind.
Seeing as Yudkin and Keys were mentioned I've changed my mind again... some might find it interesting.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/07/the-sugar-conspiracy-robert-lustig-john-yudkin

Lustig has been thoroughly debunked (by data from meta analyses and randomised human controlled trials) and has most likely fabricated evidence.

I only said some might find to the article interesting ( particularly the history side). I didn't say it was science.

[MischaHY]

I tried cutting sugar out of my diet completely this January and I’ve never felt so depressed. Re-introduced a little bit and hey presto my mood is way better. I like the stuff.

Could you define what sugar means to you in this context? Are you sure you were hitting adequate calorie intake?

My experience has been that I wasn’t eating enough when removing it due to being used to energy dense foods. Adding more fats fixed this and improved satiation considerably for me.

[T_B]

I avoided anything that obviously had sugar in it. The only sweet thing I ate was the odd Nakd bar before a climbing session. Tbh I cycle commute 4 x pw (30 mins each way), run 3 - 4 x pw and climb 3 - 4 x pw. I was struggling to eat enough I think, though was having bacon and egg on toast for lunch some days instead of my usual peanut butter on toast. I eat tons of nuts. Didn’t feel under fuelled really.

[Paul B]

I'm sure the cigarette companies did plenty for F1.

The thread has moved on quite a bit since my post but it wasn't necessarily intended to label Cigs and 'Big Sugar' as one and the same in terms of harm ( ), more that it was probably inconceivable at one time to consider sports/motorsport without their involvement whereas I hope (idealistically as JWI pointed out) that people would recognise the negative impacts of such sponsors and look elsewhere (again, easy to say when nobody is offering you a case of Red Bull and a big fat cheque).

The other point was simply that them looking after their people is just good business, protecting their investment in what is a form of advertising which they have already sunk money, rather than altruistically through some form of positive culture. The same is true for my wife who has private healthcare through work. She had an injury this year which resulted in a fractured shoulder and after A&E treatment the NHS appointment was 1-month in the future. Through work she was seen in a matter of days and she was already receiving physio by the 1-month mark. That benefit meant that her employer minimised lost time from her injury (and the positive benefits of that being on offer allows her employer to attract the kind of employees they want).

Incidentally, I go through a horrendous amount of sugar (in the form of gels and electrolyte drinks). I also drink Coke (affectionately termed a Red Ambulance) if anyone wants to point out my hypocrisy on such issues.

[Fiend]

Surely top climbers should be sponsored by weight loss drugs and radical diet programs?? At least that would be spot on for the target market...

[mrjonathanr]

I tried cutting sugar out of my diet completely this January and I’ve never felt so depressed.

Hardly surprising, your microbiome isn't going to appreciate a change that drastic.

Reducing sugar was a game-changer for me a few years back (that and making sure when I do eat a load of it that it's after or alongside a good intake of fats and proteins). No more abrupt debilitating energy crashes and needing to eat every 20 minutes. But everyone's different.

I cut out obvious sugar in September, excepting a hot chocolate once a day max. It took some discipline to maintain at first, but feels fine otherwise. By ‘cut out’ I mean no obvious sources such as sweets, bars etc, basic muesli rather than processed cereals, meals mostly properly prepared from ingredients. Obviously eliminating sugar would be nigh on impossible given its ubiquity in tinned food, sauces and everything even vaguely processed. Nor would it be desirable to cut out fruit and starchy vegetables, obviously.


I’m happy to continue like this.

[cheque]

I might have missed it but no-one seems to have mentioned how bad sugar is for your teeth.

I don’t eat sugar (or more accurately, sugary snacks, obviously there’s some form of sugar in most food) at the start of the year, til at least the end of February, sometimes til Easter, which is when I become much more active again. Like quitting anything after about three weeks the habit has become not doing it rather than doing it and you can continue indefinitely. But fuck doing it indefinitely because sugar’s nice.

R e d Bull are going to have to sponsor a hell of a lot of climbers to get kids off that Prime stuff.

Climbers don’t seem to be that affected by all the money R e d Bull pump into sponsorship do they? Has anyone else ever seen a climber drink one (or any fizzy pop for that matter) at the crag or wall? My mate has the most incredibly sugar-based diet and I’ve only known him to drink pop while climbing twice- once when we found an unopened can at the crag and once when he found a reduced bottle of cherryade when buying sandwiches.

It’s ridiculous that UKB still auto-censors R e d Bull when the only person who ever wanted it quit the forum years ago and it stops us posting working links to Reel Rock videos.

[jwi]

Climbers don’t seem to be that affected by all the money R e d Bull pump into sponsorship do they? Has anyone else ever seen a climber drink one (or any fizzy pop for that matter) at the crag or wall?

People doing sports are obviously not the target audience for sugary drinks. They are used to sell a image of this form of candy as a somewhat healthy harmless upper to a mass market audience. If an athelete uses it, how bad can it really be for the body?

It’s ridiculous that UKB still auto-censors R e d Bull when the only person who ever wanted it quit the forum years ago and it stops us posting working links to Reel Rock videos.

No, it is funny. Keep it! It is lore!