Download Sugar-Free Diets: An Ayurvedic Review

Sugar-Free Diets: An Ayurvedic Review
by Nadia Marshall
One of the biggest health fads sweeping
the nation at the moment is the sugarelimination diet. When people started
turning up at our Zen retreats last month
with ‘fructose intolerance’ and ‘no sugar’
as a dietary requirement (and I am the
chef) I thought it was about time I
attempted an impartial investigation of
the idea. Being an Ayurvedan (that isn’t a word)
and a recovering dietary fanatic, I am
committed to a moderate approach to
eating. The idea of eliminating any food
from my diet tends to sound off my
alarm bells. The idea of quitting sugar
when I’ve finally allowed myself to
embrace the sweetness of jaggery and
less-refined sugars without guilt….
sounds them off even more! But I wanted to understand where these
sugar-free folk are coming from. And
perhaps you do too? So here is the low
down for your reading pleasure….
Why are people giving up sugar?
The idea of giving up sugar is based on a
shift in thinking. We’re used to thinking
of sugar as ‘empty calories’ or energy
without nutrition. But not many of us
think of sugar as something extremely
harmful to our bodies (unless we’re
diabetic). To our teeth, yes… to our livers
and pancreas, maybe… but not many of
us think of sugar as a poison.
Proponents of the sugar-elimination
approach do. They argue that sugar is an
extremely harmful substance to the
human body… and they have a lot of
good science to back it up. They argue
that giving up sugar will lead to
weightloss, improved digestion, fewer
cravings, increased energy, balanced
hormones, increased longevity, improved
immunity and will directly decrease the
likelihood of developing metabolic
syndrome, obesity, diabetes, hypertension,
heart disease, kidney diseases, liver
diseases and cancer (1 & 3). Just a few of
PRODUCED BY THE MUDITA INSTITUTE
the biggest diseases facing our
population!
Is it all sugar we need to give up?
If you do any amount of reading on this
approach, you soon realise that not all
sugar is considered poison to the body.
Just one is - Fructose. Most of you will
immediately associate fructose with the
sugar found in fruit but fructose is
actually found in most foods of plant
origin (including tree and vine fruits,
berries, grains and most root vegetables).
It is also now found in virtually all
processed food.
Here’s a quick lesson on sugar. There are
three monosaccharides (simple sugars/
simple carbohydrates) in our diet –
fructose, glucose and galactose. Fructose
and glucose often combine in nature to
form sucrose. Glucose and galactose
combine to form lactose (the sugar found
in milk). Complex sugars/carbohydrates
refer to long chains of simple sugars
joined together and are found in starchy
grains and vegetables.(1)
Dietary Mono-saccharides
Fructose, Glucose, Galactose
Dietary Di-saccharides
Sucrose = Fructose + Glucose
Lactose = Glucose + Galactose
hormone (ghrelin) is suppressed so our
brain knows we’re full. For every 100
calories of glucose we eat, less than about
2% is turned into fat (2).
Fructose is metabolised in a completely
different way to glucose. The only cells in
the body that use fructose for energy are
sperm cells, so unlike glucose, it isn’t
readily used as an energy source. When
we eat fructose, insulin isn’t released and
our hunger hormone isn’t suppressed so
there is no ‘off ’ switch for eating
fructose. Fructose is either bonded to
cellulose and transported out of the GI
tract or processed by the liver into uric
acid (which causes gout and
hypertension), citrates (acids), aldehydes
(toxic to the body), lipid droplets (fat) and
free fatty acids. The free fatty acids affect
the insulin receptors in the liver which
can directly lead to liver insulin resistance
(i.e. type 2 diabetes). Fructose metabolism
also leads to the formation of very low
density LDL cholesterol - the type of bad
cholesterol that causes plaques in our
arteries. And, fructose is 7-10 times more
likely to form AGEs than glucose
metabolism (AGEs are advanced
glycation end-products and have been
implicated in the progression of agerelated diseases like Alzheimers, heart
disease and stroke). For every 100 calories
of fructose we eat, about 30% is turned
into fat (2)…. but because of its effect on
the brain, we still think we’re starving and
eat more!
Fructose vs Glucose Metabolism
What is fructose in?
Glucose is pretty important for the body.
In fact, it is the energy of life. Every
single cell in the human body can use
glucose as a source of energy. When we
eat glucose, we release insulin which tells
the liver, muscle and fat tissues to take up
the glucose and store it in its non-toxic
form (glycogen) for later use. Therefore,
glucose is also known as ‘blood sugar’
and is measured when working out G.I.
levels of food. Another good thing about
glucose is when we eat it, our hunger
1!
Fructose is in nearly everything so it is
pretty difficult to avoid altogether. It is in
fruit, dried fruit, some root vegetables,
most grains, honey, agave nectar, maple
syrup and anything containing sucrose
(including all sugars). Tree fruits, berries
and melons all have moderate levels of
fructose while dried fruits have more
concentrated levels of fructose.
WWW.MUDITAINSTITUTE.COM
Fructose is also found in very high
quantities in soft drinks, fruit juices,
concentrated fruit drinks, sports drinks,
sauces and condiments, chocolate,
cookies, museli bars, cereals, yoghurt,
lunch meats and most other processed
food (especially low-fat foods). In many
processed foods, it is found in the form
of High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS).
Hard-core proponents of the sugarelimination approach argue that there is
no difference between natural sugars and
man-made sugars as they are metabolised
in the same way (and from a purely
biochemical perspective, they are right).
So, they suggest you give up most of the
above!
High fructose corn syrup = 42-90%
fructose Agave nectar = up to 90% fructose Table sugar, Raw sugar, brown sugar =
50% fructose
Honey = 50% fructose
Maple syrup = 48% fructose
Dried fruits = 10-20% fructose
Most tree fruits = 4-8% fructose
sources: (1) & (3)
Why do processed foods contain so
much fructose?
When westerners still ate home-cooked
meals, our sugar intake was pretty normal
and epidemic rates of hypertension and
obesity didn’t exist. Even when food
processing first arrived on the scene, the
situation was still okay.
This all changed in the 1970s with the
simultaneous discovery of LDL
cholesterol, the invention of high
fructose corn syrup in Japan and a study
by the American Scientist, Ancel Keys. It
was at this time, as a result of Ancel’s
work, that the ‘lipid hypothesis’ was truly
taken on board – the idea that dietary fat
causes heart disease (2). In response to
this idea, food manufacturers started
taking all the fat out of our food.
Unfortunately this made it taste like
cardboard! The solution? Add more salt
and more sugar. Much more!
At the same time, President Nixon was
keen to get food off of the political
agenda by making it cheaper… and sugar
was expensive. But High Fructose Corn
Syrup was about half the price – and so
began the infiltration of HFCS onto
supermarket shelves (2). Fructose is 1.73
PRODUCED BY THE MUDITA INSTITUTE
times sweeter than sucrose so you’d think
they wouldn’t need to use as much (1).
Wrong. They use more. Since that time,
the amounts of HFCS have gone up and
up and our low fat diets have been
making us all fatter and sicker than we’ve
ever been before…
Is HFCS so bad?
The corn industry in America would
argue HFCS is no worse than sucrose
because it contains about the same levels
of fructose and glucose (although there
are actually three types of HFCS with
varying levels of fructose from 42% to
55% and up to 90%) (1). All short-term
studies on the stuff indicate it has a
similar affect on the body as sucrose. The
only real difference I could find between
HFCS and your average table sugar is the
fructose and glucose in HFCS exist in a
‘free’ state (as mono-saccharides rather
than as a di-saccharides) so they are even
more ‘simple’ (1). The other troubling
thing I found was a 2009 study which
reported almost half of the commercial
brands of HFCS had detectable levels of
mercury in them – a cross-contamination
bi-product of the production process.
As there have been no long-term studies
into the affect of HFCS on the body
compared to sucrose, all I can really
conclude is: the main reason HFCS is so
bad is because it is super cheap to
produce and so readily available. This
means it is used by manufacturers without
hesitation or moderation.
Someone who eats a processed western
diet consumes at least four times as much
fructose as someone who eats homecooked meals and a natural consumption
of fruits and vegetables. Teenagers are
particularly at risk, because they tend to
eat even more.(2)
From a GI perspective, foods with a high
GI (70 or more) are considered bad for
us because our bodies have to release a
huge hit of insulin to mop up the glucose
from our blood stream. This can result in
blood sugar swings – from high blood
sugar to lower than normal blood sugar,
creating moodiness and sugar cravings. If
we ride the blood sugar roller coaster for
too long, our insulin receptors may get
worn out, resulting in type 2 diabetes.
Eating low GI foods (55 or less) is
encouraged – to help moderate blood
sugar levels and give our poor pancreas,
liver and insulin receptors a break.
Anything that slows down the
metabolism of sugar decreases its GI.
And the two things that slow the
metabolism of sugar the most are fibre
and fat. These are also the two things that
have been taken out of all of our
processed food!
An interesting point here is - fructose
sweeteners are often recommended for
low GI diets or people with diabetes
because no insulin is required to
metabolise it. It therefore has a much
lower GI than other sugars. But,
hopefully you now understand this is a
bad idea because fructose directly affects
our insulin receptors in the liver at a later
stage of metabolism! It is a cause of
diabetes, even more so than glucose.
The problems with the approach
The main problem I can see with the
sugar-elimination approach, as with all
reductionist approaches is it can promote
fanaticism if taken out of context.
Without appropriate research, people can
miss the point.
For example, if people don’t understand
that the antidote to fructose is fibre
(because fructose bonded to cellulose is
excreted), they may give up eating fruit
Where does GI fit in to all this?
altogether (although if you're a fruit-aGI or the Glycemic Index is a measure of holic, cutting back on your fruit
consumption isn't a bad idea). This
the effect of carbohydrates in food on
blood sugar levels. It estimates how much approach may also lead to people cutting
out complex carbohydrates as well as
each gram of available carbohydrate in a
food raises a person's blood glucose level simple ones – that is, giving up
wholegrains as well as sugar. I noticed
after eating, relative to the consumption
that some proponents of the approach
of glucose. The GI chart can be
tell you to give up fruit but say you can
measured from 0 to 100 with glucose
still drink alcohol – even though ethanol
having a GI of 100.(1) is made from the fermentation of sugar
and is metabolised with even more
detrimental effects to the body.
2!
WWW.MUDITAINSTITUTE.COM
Another problem with this approach is
that a lot of the ‘replacement’ snacks and
foods recommended in sugar-elimination
diets (like cheese, meat and coconut
products) are actually quite heavy and
difficult to digest so may have there own
deleterious effects on digestion.
Some people in a fructose-fearing-frenzy
may decide to give up fructose in favour
of glucose. They may buy dextrose (used
to make beer) from the supermarkets and
use that as their sole sweetener of choice.
Not a bad idea, in theory, but the
problem is glucose doesn’t exist as a disaccharide with itself in nature so this is
frankin-sugar (which makes me a little
nervous)… with a super high G.I.
But the biggest problem of
all is… no matter how you
dress it up, giving up sugar is
about deprivation. And
anything that is based on
deprivation is rather
depressing and usually not
sustainable beyond the first
wave of weightloss euphoria.
In my experience, a more
moderate approach is usually
required for long-term
success.
The great things about the approach
The most fantastic thing about this
approach is it encourages people to
reduce their consumption of soft drinks,
processed foods and fast foods… and to
make more home-cooked meals. If we all
just did these three things, the health of
the Western world (and the Eastern world
adopting the Western diet) would be
completely transformed.
Another very exciting part of this
approach is it tends to encourage people
to start eating moderate levels of healthy
fats again, including full-fat milk. It has
brought attention to the fact that fat is
not necessarily the great evil it has been
made out to be and that fructose may
infact be the cause of most of our
Western health problems.
The Ayurvedic view
PRODUCED BY THE MUDITA INSTITUTE
Ayurveda, as usual, has a slightly more
holistic view but reaches many of the
same conclusions as this approach.
Rather than looking at sweet as
molecules, it looks at Sweet as a taste,
made up of elements and qualities which
all have an effect on the body and mind.
In addition to the bio-chemical
understanding, Ayurveda provides us
with a bio-energetic and bio-spiritual
understanding of food.
Before I delve into the detail, it should be
noted that the Sweet taste is considered
by Ayurveda as the most important of all
of the six tastes and should be eaten in
the largest quantity. But by Sweet,
Ayurveda means naturally sweet foods
including milk, ghee, rice, wheat and
other grains and legumes, as well as sweet
fruits, dates, honey, jaggery and sugar.
Composed of Earth and Water, the Sweet
taste is generally cooling, heavy and
unctuous. Ayurveda teaches that the
Sweet taste nourishes and invigorates the
mind, relieves hunger and thirst, increases
all of the tissues and improves the
immune system. Importantly, it is
associated with the positive emotions of
happiness, contentment, calmness,
cheerfulness, love and satisfaction when
eaten in appropriate amounts. However, if eaten in excess, particularly at
the wrong time of the year, Ayurveda
says that the Sweet taste can contribute to
high ama, dull agni/digestive fire,
heaviness, obesity, diabetes, parasites,
obstructed circulation, vomiting, gas,
lethargy, asthma, hayfever and congestion
(undigested food waste or ama correlates
to the western view of very low density
LDL cholesterol and AGEs). Excessive
sweet can also feed attachment,
complacency and greed in the mind.
If you are following an Ayurvedic diet to
the letter, you will naturally be avoiding
processed foods including soft drinks,
sports drinks, condiments, cereals,
sweeties etc. You’ll also tend to have less
fruit and fruit-juice because you only eat
(or drink) it between meals, rather than
with everything. You mostly eat homecooked meals made from wholegrains,
legumes, vegetables, spices, fats/oils and
full-fat milk – all low fructose and low
GI. Although you do eat small quantities
of dry fruit and natural sweeteners in
your porridges and home-made sweeties,
they’re usually consumed with
wholegrains and spices (i.e. fibre) and
ghee (i.e. fat), both of which slow down
3!
the metabolism of sugar. And, you eat
loads of cinnamon which helps to
regulate blood sugar levels. Importantly,
you also introduce Sweetness to your life
in other ways… not just through your
food.
Some people take the ‘eat lots of sweet’
thing in Ayurveda a little too literally and
decipher it as ‘eat lots of sugar’. This
tends to manifest in the form of ultrasweet chai drunk throughout the day! But
this is not the actual teaching of
Ayurveda and is definitely not something
a practitioner would advise you to do.
Ayurveda is a science of long-term
moderation combined with well-timed
and precise restraint.
The main difference between
the Ayurvedic view and the
western view is Ayurveda
believes every single sugar is
different due to its qualities.
For example, honey is sweet and heating,
has the specific effect of ‘scraping fat’
from the body and it pacifies Vata and
Kapha while increasing Pitta. Jaggery is
sweet and cooling, has a heavy,
strengthening effect on the body and
pacifies Vata while increasing Pitta and
Kapha. White sugar and HFCS on the
other hand, are sweet, heating, have a
stimulating effect on the body and
aggravate all of the doshas (Vata, Pitta
and Kapha).
This demonstrates the more ‘gross’
effects on the body/mind. However,
perhaps the biggest difference comes
when looking at the ‘subtle’ effect of
these substances on the body/mind
through the three universal qualities of
Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Less processed
sugars like jaggery, honey and maple
syrup are considered more Sattvic, having
a peaceful effect on our minds. Highly
processed sugars like white sugar and
HFCS as well as synthetic replacement
sweeteners, on the other hand, are Rajasic
and Tamasic – creating strong outwardseeking desire combined with dullness,
depression and ignorance in the mind.
WWW.MUDITAINSTITUTE.COM
So, from an Ayurvedic
perspective, sugars ain't
sugars! You should always
choose more natural sugars
over their highly processed
counterparts! The Sweet taste is the natural antidote to
aggravated Vata (Air/Ether). We live in a
world that constantly aggravates our Vata
so we naturally look to Sweet to ground
ourselves. Unfortunately, highly processed
sugar and HFCS are the only types of
sugar that increase Vata rather than
decreasing it. So, as we reach out to pacify
our Vata, we actually end up aggravating
it further which leaves us wanting more
and more Sweet! Vaidya Dr Smita Naram
teaches that the majority of obesity these
days is Vata-type obesity (rather than
Kapha-type). Our light-headedness longs
for grounding so we eat and eat to try and
ground ourselves… but just get more
light-headed, and hungrier (and fatter)
due to the junk we're eating!
My conclusion
After reading, watching and thinking
about sugar for many days, the
conclusion I come to with all this is the
same as any other dietary article I’ve
written or ever considered writing.
And that conclusion is… don’t worry too
much about the details. Instead, pick up
on the important take home message
which is:
And, if you want to take things further
than that, start learning about Ayurveda.
It is pretty unlikely I'll ever give up sugar
personally but I do feel better about my
limited fruit consumption and I’m extra
motivated to make my own sweet treats
rather than buying toxic cookies from the
supermarket! I also now understand why
others might choose to give up sugar (at
least for a little while). “Whatever works”,
I say!
References/More reading/More
watching
1) Wikipedia searches - Sugar, Fructose,
Glucose, Sucrose, Dextrose, Maltose,
HFCS
2) “Sugar: The Bitter Truth” http://
www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6oM&ob=av3e
3) “I Quit Sugar eBook”, Sarah Wilson
4) “Pure, White and Deadly”, John
Yudgin
5) “Sweet Poison”, David Gillespie
Nadia Marshall is an Ayurvedic Lifestyle
Consultant, Ayurvedic Cook, Professional
Writer and Blogger. She is also Managing
Director of the Mudita Institute and Health
Clinic. If you would like to know more about
eating Ayurvedically, Nadia has written an
Ayurvedic Food & Lifestyle Course, called
"AGNI", that walks you through the concepts
of Ayurvedic eating, cooking and living in a way
that is both fun and super easy to understand. For more information go to her blog,
www.agniblog.com
Take back control of your
food. Stop eating so much
processed food. Stop
drinking soft drinks, sports
drinks and poor-quality
sweeties entirely. Cut down
your consumption of coffee
and alcohol. And...start
cooking at home… with love!
Especially for your kids! Eat
more plants. Stop eating so
much. And get some
moderate exercise, everyday.
PRODUCED BY THE MUDITA INSTITUTE
4!
WWW.MUDITAINSTITUTE.COM