More manipulation with peoples minds

Now I repeat what Dr Lustig presented to the audience in few points with the corresponding illustrations from his presentation. 

When making conclusion what primarily contributed to the constantly increasing prevalence of obesity, he said: 

"No, It is not fat, what we are eating more - we are eating more of carbohydrate. "

Below is the diagram he used for the demonstration. It all looks fine, except that it was still 20 years old trends presented as the current ones, these were true. The increased consumption of carbohydrates was the major contributor to the increased energy intake by a few hundred calories per capita per day.

Dr Lusting continues:

"And specifically, what kind of carbohydrates? Well, beverages."

This slide a sort of says it all, he claims.

Impressive again, is it not? Those percents. What a huuuge increase! WOW!

Except that this trend did not continue beyond 2000 and I have data for it. What is more, when you look at the Y axis, you see that the increase of soft drinks was only about 70 grams, which is the volume of the drink. 70 milliliters increase. How much sugar is that? I tell you, it is far less than the 5 g of fat increase over the same period of time. But this sort of presentation easily drags the audience to the picture the presenter wants them to see. 

No wonder this looked so impressive after all, the Coca-Cola conspiracy: 

Why it was important to highlight that we do not know the formula of the Coca-Cola syrup? You check the Nutrition Facts label on the product and you know how much sugar you have in the drink and also the ingredients. It is mainly the flavoring they have secret so nobody can copy the unique flavor of Coca-Cola, despite there are many Cola style drinks very similar to the original.

A little calculation and conversion into calories and particular volume, and you will find that one 330 ml of classic Cola contains 139 kcal and 35 g of sugar. Therefore in the amount of 70 ml is 7.4 g of sugar, making it 30 kcal. Little less or about the same can apply to fruit drinks, the consumption of which also increased among adolescents, as the previous diagram suggests. Now, compare it to the 5g of fat and its 45 kcal increased intake for the whole population. And I know from the USDA data that the consumption of sugar and fat calories had almost identical curve over the decades since 1970 until 2000 for the whole population as average, not just adolescents as presented here. Adolescents are just the highest consumers of soft drinks from the whole population. On the population level the sugar and fat basically shared the trend like twins, hence nothing like 'sugar went up while fat went down'. That is rubbish.

Got it?

This is how Dr Lustig has been distorting the picture all the time. Moreover, the peer reviewed articles confirm that it was not the sugar carbohydrate that increased the most. It was starches of various kinds. Follow my articles and you will learn the truth.