Surprising evaluation: children with high candy consumption still with a lower risk of being overweight

Surprising evaluation: children with high candy consumption still with a lower risk of being overweight

We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

New major study in the top journal of the American Society for Nutrition
A recent large-scale analysis of 19 studies, published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, the top scientific journal of the American Society for Nutrition, showed that the chances of being overweight and obese were the highest in sweets and chocolates among children and adolescents 18% lower than that of the "normal snack" (reference group). The authors, surprised by their own results, recommend: "Measures against obesity should focus on other nutritional elements instead of sweets." [1]

This study fits in with a number of scientific studies in recent years that have put supposed eating wisdom to absurdity - for example, adolescents with high fast food consumption had low BMI and the relationship between soft drinks and obesity remained unclear [2,3]. "Fast food, soft drinks and sweets are branded as fattening foods so that perplexed food apostles can present 'guilty' to the public," explains nutritionist and author Uwe Knop, "there is not a single proof of their fattening effects - on the contrary: current studies show either no connection or a connection that is undesirable from a nutritional point of view - namely that the higher the consumption of the supposed fatteners, the lower the body weight.

Diplom-Ökotrophologe Knopf has critically analyzed more than 1,000 current studies for his new Rowohlt book Nutritional Delusion * - his conclusion is clear: "Nobody can say what healthy eating is - because nutritional research is like reading a crystal ball, since this evidence-limited branch of research is not hard Evidence, but because of the system only provides soft hypotheses. "

Three new studies: "food medicine" chocolate?
Further current "chocolate studies" in adults have shown that chocolate consumption is associated with a low risk of cardiac circulatory disorders and heart attack [4] as well as of mental degradation [5]. Furthermore, a study in the British Journal of Nutrition showed that daily chocolate consumption was associated with a reduced likelihood of insulin resistance, an important risk factor for the metabolic syndrome [6]. Is chocolate a "unhealthy fattening agent" or a "healthy food medicine"? According to Knopf, these three studies also confirm the ecotrophological universal credo: Nothing precise is not known ...

"Poor nutrition research"
The desolate state of ecotrophological research has long been known to experts. The director of the German Cochrane Center, which assesses the quality of scientific studies, said Prof. Gerd Antes back in 2011: “The nutritional sciences are in a pitiful situation. Studies in this area are dependent on many unknown or hardly measurable influences. That is why there are always completely contradicting results ”[7]. Just a year later, his “study assessment colleague” from the state IQWiG (Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care), Dr. Klaus Koch, on the core weakness of nutritional observation studies: “Epidemiological studies can usually not provide any evidence. Point “[8]. For Prof. Gabriele Meyer, former chair of DNEbM e.V. (German Evidence-Based Medicine Network) and currently a member of the Expert Council of Federal Minister of Health Hermann Gröhe, it is clear: "Observational studies are not suitable to derive preventive or therapeutic recommendations" [9]. One of the reasons: Observational studies only provide correlations (statistical relationships), but never causalities (cause-effect relationships / evidence).

The scientific weakness of nutritional research, which is inherent in the system, has also been repeatedly mentioned in numerous scientific publications recently: Many of its results are “completely untrustworthy” - and “another million observational studies” would not provide any definitive solutions [10]. Due to the numerous weaknesses of these studies, politicians are cautioned to “exercise greater caution when making dietary recommendations”, since these are primarily based on observational studies that have not been confirmed by clinical studies [11].

"Not enough scientific evidence"
Accordingly, it was only a matter of time before in February 2016 Prof. Peter Stehle, member of the Presidium of the DGE eV (German Nutrition Society), publicly revealed that nutrition researchers have a problem: “We cannot provide enough scientific evidence. "Because that is" actually difficult, providing evidence. "The observed results of nutritional research are therefore" argumentatively, of course, very, very weak. But that has always been the case and will remain so. ”For these studies, which provide hard evidence, i.e. evidence of healthy eating, for example, Stehle explains:“ There will never be such intervention studies. ”Also when asked how high the influence of Diet is on health (constitution), says Stehle in plain language: “That cannot be quantified. Nobody knows that ”[12]. Accordingly, the conclusion about healthy eating by Prof. Jana Rückert-John, Fulda University of Applied Sciences: "What remains in the end is to eat a balanced diet." You should eat everything and the "pleasure and fun of eating in Do not lose in the wake of the whole health craze. "[13]


[1] At J Clin Nutr. 2016 May; 103 (5): 1344-56. doi: 10.3945 / ajcn.115.119883.
Epub 2016 Apr 13 / Confectionery consumption and overweight, obesity, and related outcomes in children and adolescents: a systematic review anmeta-analy-
sis. Abstract and full publication NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST Am J Clin Nutr: “The best clinical research journal in the nutrition field.”
[3] Child Obes. 2015 Aug; 11 (4): 338-46. doi: 10.1089 / chi.2014.0117
Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and Obesity among Children and Adolescents: A Review of Systematic Literature Reviews
[2] BMJ-Open 2014; 4: e005813, dos: 10.1136 / bmjopen-2014-005813 / Fast-food consumption and body mass index in children and adolescents: an international cross-sectional study

[4] Heart. 2016 Jul 1; 102 (13): 1017-22. dos: 10.1136 / heartjnl-2015-309203. Epub 2016 Mar 2 / Chocolate consumption and risk of myocardial infarction: a prospective study and meta-analysis
[5] J Alzheimers Dis. 2016 May 6; 53 (1): 85-93. doi: 10.3233 / JAD-160142. / Chocolate Consumption is Associated with a Lower Risk of Cognitive Decline
[6] Br J Nutr. 2016 May; 115 (9): 1661-8. toi: 10.1017 / S0007114516000702. Pub 2016 Mar 17. / Daily chocolate consumption is inversely associated with insulin
resistance and liver enzymes in the Observation of Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Luxembourg study
[7] Süddeutsche Zeitung “Falsche Früchtchen”
[8] Spiegel online, "Overrated health studies: Those who believe too much remain stupid" [9] Novo arguments, "Diet rules - where's the data?"
[10] Implausible results in human nutrition research - Definitive solutions won't come from another million observational papers or small randomized trials
[11] Limitations of Observational Evidence: Implications for Evidence-Based Dietary Recommendations
[12] Bonn General Anzeiger, "The consumer does not understand the word risk"
[13] "Cheap food is an indicator of prosperity" (Uwe Knop)

Author and source information

Video: Weighing the Facts of Obesity (July 2022).


  1. Hadad

    Very helpful blog, the author always (almost) covers hot topics. Thanks.

  2. Jeannette

    Your topic has been like a parable of voyazytsya all over the Internet for a month now. It is also sometimes called the bearded boyan. But in general, thanks kaneshn

  3. Ogdon

    Propertyman goes, what then

Write a message