I know it doesn’t ‘cause’ it, per se, but it’s still a ‘factor’ (or can be, rather) yet it seems some disagree with that description.
Is it ‘misleading’ to say that consuming sugar can lead to type 2 diabetes?
I think it’s misleading as stated. At a minimum “excess consumption of sugar can lead to diabetes” would be somewhat more reasonable.
In isolation it implies a more direct connection between the two when the reality is other factors are much higher indicators such as genetics, excess body weight, and physical inactivity.
So in a list of those factors it’s more reasonable than as a standalone statement, but then when excess consumption of anything, along with physical inactivity, is going to lead to excess body weight, it seems a little redundant.
No its not misleading because sugar consumption is a known risk factor.
If you said sugar consumption leads to type 1, that would be an outright lie.
My understanding is excessive sugar consumption reveals type 2 diabetes. The underlying cause tends to be genetic and excessive sugar consumption accelerates the arrival of symptoms.
It’s like how you can be allergic to bees your whole life and just never get stung by bees.
Its thus not completely misleading to say excessive consumption of sugar may lead to diabetes, like bee stings can lead to an allergic reaction.
Had to research this one a bit. There is no proof someone can be immune to type 2 diabetes.
Your statement seems to stand because of this. I was originally thinking you would need a qualifier like some or most people, but no research supports that.
Thanks for researching. Any specific citations?
Well I was just researching evidence of genetic immunity on the premise that your statement wouldn’t be accurate if it included everyone. I certainly did not do an exhaustive study so I may have missed something.
Across the articles it appears there may be no smoking gun in regards to genetics one way or the other with obesity and age being the biggest risk factors.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3746083/
https://hms.harvard.edu/news/protective-mutations-type-2-diabetes
Fair enough, thanks for that
If it doesn’t, then what does?
People are arguing all sorts of other causes like obesity, genetics, etc.
Would it happen without a trigger?
I would argue no, but it seems others know differently
Obesity from sugar in diet, genetics doesn’t make sense unless humans have hit some form of hyper evolution. Type 1 is genetics, relatively rare, type 2 can be influenced by genetics, but avoided by diet.
I would still argue that that means sugar consumption can lead to type 2 in some sense, even if it’s not the direct cause, perhaps an indirect cause.
Sugar is bad for almost every part of our body. For example, sugar that makes its way to your skin cells has been linked to early wrinkles in your skin. Sugar in your “eye” cells can lead to worsening eye problems. This is a lifetime scale though so you won’t usually see immediate affects. Just look up papers about the effects of consuming sugar on the human body. I once did a deep dive. I am type 2 diabetic myself.
I would say that it is technically misleading, but it’s misleading in the way that your telling your kid to do a thing “because I told you so”.
There is depth and nuance available in that conversation, but it requires effort to express it and explain it completely.
I’d prefer “ultra-processed, non-whole foods & beverages that especially contain added sugar beyond naturally-occurring density and absent of regulating soluble fiber increases diabetes risk” but yeah
