Sixty minutes sugar story1/4/2024 We’re sorry that 60 Minutes elected not to contribute to the solution. Access to simple, accurate information is a good start to help consumers make healthy and informed decisions. When provided with accurate information consumers are capable of making educated choices and balanced nutritional decisions without the restrictive burdens of more government regulations and bans to limit any one product. To vilify any single food or ingredient as the main culprit behind numerous serious illnesses provides little benefit to American consumers. The assertion that high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and all-natural sugar are the same and treated by our bodies the same is inaccurate. That per-capita consumption of all-natural sugar has declined nearly 40 percent since 1970 underscores the fact that singling out sugar is shortsighted and baseless. Every major review of the full body of scientific evidence has concluded that sugar intake is not linked to any lifestyle disease. Americans now consume 130 pounds per person a year. In choosing this direction, 60 Minutes overshadowed the fact that total caloric intake remains the fundamental cause of a myriad of illnesses facing Americans. But as sugar and high fructose corn syrup became cheaper to refine and produce, we started gorging on them. Colorado River Basin, ravaged by drought, plans for a drier future Students and parents from five Chicago high schools getting sent to college for free Inside the European song contest that draws an audience of more than 180 million. We provided the producers with numerous scientific studies, government statistics and access to a sugar cane farm in Louisiana in the hopes the proposed segment would be fair, objective and balanced. Every available episode for Season 54 of 60 Minutes on Paramount+. When the Sugar Association was approached by 60 Minutes last year to participate in a segment focusing on sweeteners, we saw it as an opportunity to work with and educate them on the facts about sugar, an all-natural ingredient that has been part of healthy and balanced diets for more than 2,000 years. The segment amplified inaccuracies, unproven hypotheses and baseless accusations-unfortunately, this approach contributes to the problem and doesn’t advance the solution. Rather, they chose a skewed approach that is a disservice to consumers because it focused on one-sided research results and hypotheses. I preferred the evening show with Sanjay Gupta over the morning show featuring a partially informed registered dietitian, who stated that we should get our sugar only from natural, healthy sources like fruit and yogurt. They had a feature story on both the CBS Sunday Morning as well as their iconic 60 Minutes show in the evening. Not that the two need be related in any way at all…such is the nature of commerce.We are extremely disappointed that 60 Minutes missed a teachable moment to provide a balanced segment and help inform its viewers and American consumers about the role all-natural sugar plays in healthy diets. Apparently CBS decided to declare war on the Sugar Industry for April Fool’s this year. I’m curious to see how the subject is approached, and will get an even bigger kick out of seeing who the advertising sponsors are for the show. Almost as much as sugar is an economic food staple. It should be interesting to see how the issue is handled on the show.Īfter all, 60 minutes is a prime time media staple. The added bonus with this movement is that with more awareness, come more readily-funded studies into the subject matter, and what has been known to alternative practitioners for years, will be a standard part of western medicine practice…finally…thereby reducing or reversing a great great many health problems that people are facing today. It seems like mass awareness is finally happening, such that ten to twenty years from now, more knowledge of this issue will be commonplace. I have a huge focus on sugar in my Faceless Fat Loss materials. The long-running 60 minutes documentary show will air a segment tonight on sugar as a toxin/poison, and will likely reference the notion of placing warning labels on foods containing sugars, so that consumers are aware of how they can be negatively impacted by what they’re consuming…not too different from the warning labels we see on cigarettes.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |