‘Natural’ deception from the Sugar Industry

LoGiCane - The world's first all-natural low glycemic index cane sugar

‘Natural’ deception from the Sugar Industry

Low GI Sugar and marketing to ‘naturally’ confuse you 🙁

This post follows on from last night’s expose on ‘The Sugar Conspiracy on SBS. You can watch it on http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/511635011977/The-Sugar-Conspiracy

CSR (Big Sugar) have their ‘new’ sugar onto the market and they are trying to tell us how much better it is for ‘you’ because it has a lower Glycaemic Index (GI). It’s still sugar, and sugar is sugar.

As far as I can work out, they just have not refined it as much. The less refined material is now being touted as being good for you. Its all nonsense in a way to rebrand sugar for it’s benefits. What a load of codswallop.

This is a first from the sugar industry!
“One of the most important factors identified in the development of obesity is high intake of energy-dense, micronutrient-poor over processed foods including white refined sugar (Swinburn, Caterson, Seidell, & James, 2004).”

But then they tell you how much better their ‘new low GI’ product is.
“LoGiCane is less refined than white, raw and brown sugar and retains many on the nutrients usually washed out in processing, such as polyphenols, antioxidants and organic minerals.”

“developed the world’s first low GI sugar. This all natural sugar helps to maintain a healthier blood sugar level which is beneficial to the general population.”

The Glycaemic Index Ltd (Jennie Brand Miller and Sydney Uni) are backing it. LoGiCane is just sugar and you have to wonder how much CSR paid the GI group for their research and endorsement.

Jennie Brand Miller endorses it in this story “Nutritionist says it is the healthier alternative to white sugar.”

“We’re not trying to say eat more sugar,” said Professor Jennie Brand-Miller, from the University of Sydney. “But a replacement of sugar intake by this one would sound like a good idea.”

Rory Robertson has clearly investigated the GI group and Jennie Brand Miller in the past. They have been investigated for their research findings in the past.



2 thoughts on “‘Natural’ deception from the Sugar Industry

  1. Ralph Carlisle

    Hi, I found your website today while doing some research after watching the SBS program last night. I particularly noted your diagram of % fructose vs % fibre for different fruits – potentially very useful. Then I compared the diagram with the values in the table and found many discrepancies, e.g. grapes have 12.4% fructose in the table but only about 7.2% in the diagram. I realise that the % fructose is not necessarily the same in all samples of a fruit type but it does not help your credibility to have such inconsistencies in your data. Might I suggest you tidy up your data. Also, provide %fibre for the fruits in the table so the reader can plot them on the diagram, e.g. papaya. Nonetheless, bravo on running such a website.

    1. Gary Fettke Post author

      Thanks Ralph
      The data on exact percentages is quite variable. I struggle to find a consistent figure. Bananas are a classic example where the percentage changes with the ripeness and an enormous difference depending on their origin.

Comments are closed.