
Seriously, Juice Is Not Healthy - vanderfluge
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/07/opinion/sunday/juice-is-not-healthy-sugar.html
======
kareemm
I love the strange looks we get when we tell extended family that our 1.5y old
and 4y old kids don't drink juice. I had this exact conversation with a cousin
of mine last week. She checked in with me before giving my child juice. When I
told her we didn't give our kids juice this is how the conversation went:

Q: "They don't drink juice? What do they drink?"

A: "Water."

Q: "Just water?"

A: "Yep. If you want to get fancy they also drink soda water or water with
lemon."

She looked judgy and baffled at how hard-ass my wife and I were about juice.
But juice is straight calories in the form of sugar. There's no fibre to slow
absorption like you'd get with eating the whole fruit. It's not much better,
calorically speaking, than soda.

And in addition to being unhealthy, having young kids wired on sugar also
makes our life harder.

~~~
JshWright
> wired on sugar

That's not a thing.

[http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/sugar-and-
candy-...](http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/sugar-and-candy-do-not-
make-kids-hyper/)

(From one of the co-authors of this article)

~~~
brador
Have kids and give them sugar. It absolutely is a verifiable thing. You get
~2-3 hours of hyperactivity/tunnelvision followed by the crying crash to nap
combo. Every parent knows this. It's real and repeatable.

~~~
jaredklewis
Confirmation bias, meet placebo control group.

From the article:

> In my favorite of these studies, children were divided into two groups. All
> of them were given a sugar-free beverage to drink. But half the parents were
> told that their child had just had a drink with sugar. Then, all of the
> parents were told to grade their children’s behavior. Not surprisingly, the
> parents of children who thought their children had drunk a ton of sugar
> rated their children as significantly more hyperactive. This myth is
> entirely in parents’ heads. We see it because we believe it.

------
Puer
Next, let's dispel the notion that fat is bad for you. It's the strangest
thing to me to see parents feeding their kids "skim milk", which is really
just milk flavored water, because whole milk "has fat" and therefore must make
their children fat.

I only drank whole milk as a kid. A glass with every meal. My parents never
bought any juice or soda and me and all of my siblings grew up healthy and
strong with no cavities or health issues.

It makes me cringe seeing overweight children glugging down sodas, but it
makes me equally sad seeing horribly skinny children who's bones could be
broken by the wind.

~~~
orev
You’re rolling too many things into one here. The concept that fat makes
people fat as a direct consequence is false, but only if the calories gained
from that fat are reduced elsewhere. Fat contains very dense calories, so
consuming fat can lead to too many calories which leads to getting fat. That
is not to say that a diet should be devoid of fat and replaced with sugar,
just that the overall diet needs to be balanced with both, and not exceed the
number of calories required. Any amount of “glugging down sodas” is certainly
a problem, no matter if you’re also getting fat in your diet elsewhere.

On to the milk thing... Your complaint about skim milk presupposes that the
whole variety is actually meant to be consumed by humans. By “meant” I assume
that evolution has formulated the milk of various mamamals to the offspring of
their own respective species. So for that definition of “meant”, how can one
say that milk formulated for bovine offspring is meant for human consumption
as is? Would not the ratios of fat, sugars, vitamins, etc. be out of balance
with what a human needs? Right away, the widespread problem of lactose
intolerance in humans, even many babies, upholds this view even a little. So
why shouldn’t the formulation of cow’s milk as consumed by humans be altered
outside of its natural state?

~~~
emodendroket
Milk is homogenized so I am not sure how close 3.5% is to ideal. But I would
say that humans are probably pretty well adapted to drinking their milk
because they've been doing it for millennia.

The thing about fat is that it can increase feelings of satiety.

~~~
orev
> But I would say that humans are probably pretty well adapted to drinking
> their milk because they've been doing it for millennia.

Only humans of Northern European descent. Everyone else is lactose intolerant
after they are weaned.

~~~
vilmosi
That's still one in three humans.

------
phs318u
For breakfast, my wife and I squeeze a single grapefruit and single orange
(the old fashioned, manual and unfiltered way, keeping any "bits") and split
and drink that. It's not much to look at - a little over half a short glass
each. Basically we have the juice and some of the fibre from a single piece of
fruit each.

If you think about how much fruit it takes to create a 600ml bottle of juice
its crazy. If you couldn't stomach eating half a dozen oranges in a sitting,
why would you think that drinking that much juice at a time (sometimes
multiple times a day) would be good for you?

~~~
forapurpose
Serious question: Why not eat the grapefruit and/or orange? That seems like
less work, more food, and healthier (and personally I think it tastes better,
but YMMV).

~~~
phs318u
Fair question. I agree that the fruit itself tastes nicer. I could say I want
to avoid having too much fibre (as I get plenty from other sources), but in
reality I just find peeling oranges a PITA and contrary to your claim I find
it quicker to cut in half and twist each half a few times on a juicer (plus I
can just knock back the output).

~~~
forapurpose
> I just find peeling oranges a PITA

You know, I've almost forgotten about this problem. Buy clementines; they are
a kind of orange which happen to be easy to peel. For more ease, at the store
you can feel which ones have looser skin; it's no exaggeration that they are
easier to peel than plastic wrappers off of processed food. They don't even
make a mess - no dripping, no sticky fingers, etc. I can't recommend them
enough - one of the wonders of nature, or of selective breeding.

~~~
thirdsun
No we only need a proper way to eat grapefruits. Love the fruit, hate the mess
that is preparing/eating them.

------
JshWright
Here's some context on the authors:

[https://twitter.com/aaronecarroll/status/1015682328411230208](https://twitter.com/aaronecarroll/status/1015682328411230208)

~~~
throwaway080383
Does anyone else have about a 40% success rate on clicking Twitter links?
Maybe I'm rate-limited because I don't have an account, but the level of
reliability I see clicking a few links a day isn't exactly compelling.

~~~
jwilk
What do you mean by "success rate on clicking Twitter links"?

~~~
jakobegger
Links to twitter often show an error message instead of the tweet.

------
code_duck
Seems like a drastic way to say like that juice is not as healthy as eating
fruit, and is not a substitute for solid fruit. Also that it has a lot of
sugar.

When you see this headline, you’d think they might be including fresh squeeze
juice from a variety of fruits and vegetables. They seem to only be talking
about things like Coca-Cola’s Minute Maid and Walmart apple juice that the
average American feeds their children. I thought they might be talking about
juice bars. It makes me wonder, have the authors ever heard about the gigantic
national trend of drinking fresh juice? Because they don’t seem to be
referring to it at all.

I don’t know why they don’t suggest that you could give your kids less sugary
juice, fresh squeeze juice, orange juice from things other than oranges,
grapes or apples. One thing they don’t seem to realize is that many parents
give their kids HFCS soda pop. I could think of many parents who believe the
only reason to not give their children mountain dew is the caffeine. It is a
little healthier to give them juice. Especially the 100% fruit juice they’re
condemning, which is a better grade even than most juice on the shelves.

I would agree that the pasteurized, filtered, old sugary juices sold in
plastic bottles in grocery stores are not very healthy. But they contain far
fewer enzymes and vitamins and fiber than fresh squeezed juice. Maybe they
should recommend that parents buy a juicer, and give their kids diluted juice
that also includes vegetables in addition to sweet fruit.

Personally, I have been on a very restricted diet, mainly liquids all year. I
don’t have been drinking fresh squeezed juice to solve my caloric deficit, but
don’t binge on it or buy store juice because it’s clear to me that the main
component is sugar and I don’t want to tempt type 2 diabetes. I’d much rather
eat the whole fruits and vegetables if I could, but in the meantime, it’s hard
to believe that the juice of 5 apples, a bunch of chard, a beet, 2 carrots, a
stick of ginger and some celery would harm me or children.

~~~
indecisive_user
> it’s hard to believe that the juice of 5 apples, a bunch of chard, a beet, 2
> carrots, a stick of ginger and some celery would harm me or children.

Is this what each person gets or what you share with your children? That juice
alone would contain around 100g of sugar, which regardless of where it comes
from would be a lot for a single person, especially considering it won't be
their only source of sugar in a day.

The problem with juices is that they're very easy to consume compared to their
whole food counterpart and keep you full for a shorter time. I'm not sure
exactly what definition you're using for fresh squeezed juice, but if you're
not using the whole fruit then you're likely losing a lot of the fiber that
makes whole fruit healthier

~~~
code_duck
My definition of fresh squeezed juice is putting whole fruit into a juicer.

As far as 100g of sugar, yes, and that hypothetical stack of produce which is
more than one person, especially a kid, would consume in a serving. And how
much is in one can of Coke, which I’ve seen people give their children? 35
grams? In a far less healthy form, with anti-nutrients and no vitamins. This
was the point of half my comment.

No, I would not feed that entire amount to a child at once. Yes, I would feel
comfortable consuming it.

If it’s not their entire source of sugar all day - why not? Sure, some people
feed their kids eat mcdonald’s ice cream while the doctors here demonize
fruit. I’d think they could at least once mentioned that the 100% whole fruit
juice that they are slandering is healthier than the sort of product some
parents consider appropriate: [http://texas-
wholesale.com/images/products/80007%20-4236-BUG...](http://texas-
wholesale.com/images/products/80007%20-4236-BUG-JUICE-LEMON-LIME-24ct.jpg)

“The problem with juices is that they're very easy to consume compared to
their whole food counterpart and keep you full for a shorter time. I'm not
sure exactly what definition you're using for fresh squeezed juice, but if
you're not using the whole fruit then you're likely losing a lot of the fiber
that makes whole fruit healthier”

You just summed up this entire article, like I did. Yes, juice is high in
sugar, and it’s healthier to eat whole fruit because of the fiber.

I have a severe swallowing disorder btw, so I can’t consume whole fruit at
all.

Most people are there kids would never, ever sit down and eat a raw beet, two
carrots, five apples, and so forth. Nutritionally, even without the fiber, the
vitamins and enzymes of eating fresh raw fruits and vegetables are worth it,
despite the sugar, especially for people who eat the typical awful American
diet of fast and frozen food. American dietary analysis often includes a
myopic focus on one or two macro nutrients, and this is a great example.

~~~
thatthatis
Fresh squeezed won’t be appreciably healthier (on the sugar dimension). What
makes juice unhealthy compared to intact fruits and vegetables is the
mechanical separation of sugar from the fiber water matrix.

This makes the sugar all available instantly.

When you eat the whole carrot, your digestive system has to tear away the
layers of the matrix one at a time to get the sugar out. When you juice you
remove the matrix mechanically.

~~~
code_duck
Yes, I’m aware of that. However, it’s important to compare it to products that
are simply water with partially synthetic corn syrup, which millions of
children consume regularly every single day. We are talking about drinks,
after all, and it seems somewhat absurd to be suggesting that anyone eat solid
fruit when they want to have a drink.

~~~
thatthatis
I don’t think anyone is saying “eat fruit when you want a drink”. The point is
that while fruit is relatively healthy fruit juice is relatively unhealthy, on
par with sugar sweetened sodas.

Similar to how beets are relatively healthy and pure sugar (derived from
beets) is relatively unhealthy.

~~~
code_duck
I disagree for a variety of reasons. Fresh juice made from actual fruit or
preferably vegetables contains vitamins, enzymes, healthier forms of sugar and
other nutrients which make up for the presence of sugar, in my opinion. As for
the filtered, pasteurized, sugar laden, pesticide tainted brew in plastic
bottles that 95% of people and grocery stores consider 'juice', I agree that
nobody should ever consume that, under any circumstances. I'm sure that is
what these doctors are thinking of since they don't seem to mention or be
aware of actual juicing.

I'm not sure at all what the alternative proposed for a drink is - water? tea?
with no sweetener? I'm still confident that carrot, beet, tomato, whatever
juice (diluted... like people normally do) is a better choice than just about
anything with sweetener in it.

------
godzillabrennus
Sugar is bad.

Juice has a lot of sugar.

~~~
projektir
Calories are bad.

Sugar is very calorie dense.

[I'm on the lookout for direct sugar-specifically-is-bad studies so I hope to
get spammed with some]

~~~
emmanuel_1234
That's a wrong argument. Sugar is three times less calorie dense than fat.
(that's not an argument for sugar or against fat, just a fact).

------
ofrzeta
I had that discussion several times. Last time I was told that apple juice is
less healthy than apples because of the fibres (missing in the juice).

After I have done some "research" on my own I found out that 100g Apple only
contains 1g of fiber, so I guess the difference can't be that huge.

In animal testing it was found that mice who ate a diet that included apples
had up to 50 percent less tumors. Now the exact same effect was achieved by
giving them apple juice, with non-filtered apple juice being more effective,
supposedly due to a higher concentration of Procyanidins.

~~~
thatthatis
Closer to 2.5g-3g Fiber.

The major effect isn’t how much fiber, but that the sugar is trapped in a
matrix of fiber and water. Your digestive system has to tear away the outer
layers to get to the sugar, this slows the absorption of the sugar and reduces
the glycemic index.

In juice the matrix has been mechanically separated so the glycemic effect is
almost exactly the same as eating ten spoonfuls of white sugar.

------
ofrzeta
What about the difference between Fructose, Sucrose and Glucose? Fruit usually
has a quite high ratio of Fructose as far as I know. Does it matter? It
doesn't even get mentioned in the article.

------
darkstar999
It seems like this article assumes fruit juice.

For breakfast I make juice with kale (a bunch), a cucumber, carrots, and an
apple. It's a lot healthier than most other American breakfasts.

~~~
driverdan
How much sugar is in it?

------
novaRom
Why not to eat just fruits? Why a kind of juice is necessary?

~~~
maxxxxx
It seems people are trained to believe that food always needs some kind of
processing. I often eat raw bell peppers and tomato pieces at work and judging
from the comments people seem to never even have thought of that as
possibility.

Right now the best are bottled teas like "Honest Tea" for $3 a pop at lunch.
You can get something much better by buying some nice tea and brewing it
yourself. And it probably costs only 5 cents instead of $3.

~~~
projektir
For me it's raw broccoli. Most people seem to think it's supposed to be bitter
raw and I am still rather confused about that since broccoli is not bitter at
all to me.

------
startupdiscuss
Ok, what if you carbonate juice, add ginger, and call it Kombucha? Is it
healthy now?

~~~
spectrum1234
Kombucha usually has way less sugar though. I get the brands that have
4-6grams of sugar per serving.

~~~
gameswithgo
is it replaced in part by alcohol though?

~~~
throwaway5752
If you've ever tried kombucha, it's pretty obvious the ethanol has been
metabolized to acetic acid.

------
burntrelish1273
I'm continually amazed when people make obviously horrible assumptions:

\- "Weed is good because it's 'natural'" "Yeah, but so are ricin, hemlock and
nightshade."

\- "Juice is made from fruit, fruit is good, therefore juice must be good."
"Although it's not HFCS, juice has more carbs than soda."

~~~
User23
I'm also disgusted by the "it's natural" platitude some persons spout.

But that doesn't mean it's a good idea to drink the latest clinically unproven
science experiment like, for example, Coke Zero. Nobody has a clue what those
small molecules actually do besides the obvious.

