by Marion Nestle

Currently browsing posts about: Calories

Jul 16 2025

Sugary drinks are not good for you: more evidence

Sugar has long been thought to increase risks for type 2 diabetes, but whether it really does has not been easy to prove and is still a matter of debate.

A new study suggests one reason why.  It distinguishes between the effects of sugar in beverages (increased risk) and foods (no increased risk).

The study: Dietary Sugar Intake and Incident Type 2 Diabetes Risk: A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

Method: The study analyed prospective cohort studies reporting relative measures of incident T2D [type 2 diabetes] risk by categories of dietary sugar (total, free, added, fructose, sucrose) or 2 beverage sources (non-diet sugar-sweetened beverages [SSBs], fruit juice) in healthy adults.

Results: 

  • Each additional serving of SSB and fruit juice was associated with a higher risk of T2D.
  • In contrast, 20 g/d intakes of total sugar and sucrose were inversely associated with T2D.
  • No associations were found for added sugar…or fructose.

The figure shows the effect of 20 g/d sugar intake on T2D risk, in comparison to typical doses of SSB and fruit juice.

A) shows the bar plot illustrating the summary effect of a 20 g/d intake for different sugar types on risk of T2D.

B) compares these doses to typical servings sizes per day of SSBs (39 g/d) and fruit juice (23.3 g/d).

Conclusion: These findings suggest that dietary sugar consumed as a beverage (SSB and fruit juice) is associated with incident T2D risk. The results do not support the common assumption that dietary sugar (i.e., total sugar and sucrose), irrespective of type and amount, is consistently associated with increased T2D risk.

Comment: Sugar is still nutritionally empty, causes tooth decay(especially if water is unfluoridated), and is best consumed in small amounts.  But if this finding holds up, the moral is clear:  Don’t drink your calories.

Jul 15 2025

Michael Jacobson’s survey of dietary changes since 1975

Michael Jacobson, founder of CSPI and now working on developing a National Food Museum in Washington, DC has issued press release and a graph-filled report analyzing changes in the U.S. diet since 1975.

He calls the report, “Opening the 1975 Food Time Capsule – Diet, Health, & Food Industry.”

From the press release:

And the food industry has gotten a lot more concentrated:

  • In 1975, the top 20 grocers sold 40 percent of retail food. Now, just four companies (Walmart, Costco, Kroger, Ahold Delhaize) control 65 percent of the market.
  • The market shares of the top four beef, pork, and poultry processors roughly doubled over the last 50 years.

Meanwhile, food prices (adjusted for inflation) have gone up, down, or sideways. For instance, milk costs half as much as 50 years ago, while ground beef has stayed the same. Overall, consumers are spending just 11 percent of their disposable income on food now compared to 13 percent in 1975.

From the report:

Lots of fun information here!

I particularly like it because I cover these changes and lots of others in my forthcoming book What to Eat Now.  to be published on November 11 this year.

Jul 14 2025

Industry-funded study of the week: walnuts

Thanks to Matthew Kadey for this one.

The Study: The impact of a walnut-rich breakfast on cognitive performance and brain activity throughout the day in healthy young adults: a crossover intervention trial.  Food Funct., 2025,16, 1696-1707.  

Method: To examine whether walnuts led to cognitive improvements throughout the day, 32 healthy young adults, aged 18–30, were tested in a double-blind, crossover pilot study, to compare the effects of a breakfast containing 50 g walnuts with a calorie-matched control containing no nuts.

Results: Mood ratings for negative affect appeared worse following walnuts compared to control, possibly due to a general dislike of the intervention. However, walnuts elicited faster reaction times throughout the day on executive function tasks.

Conclusion:  Overall, these findings provide evidence for reaction time benefits throughout the day following a walnut-rich breakfast, while memory findings were mixed with benefits only observed later in the day.

Funding: The study was funded by the California Walnut Commission, USA. The funder made no contribution during the design or implementation of the study, nor in the interpretation of findings or the decision to publish.

Comment: People don’t like eating walnuts for breakfast?  The study managed to find enough evidence to justify the funding.  Why the California Walnut Commission keeps funding such studies makes plenty of marketing sense, if not scientific sense.  The Commission would like you to believe that there is something specially good for your health about walnuts as compared to any other nuts or foods, so you will buy walnuts rather than those others.  Walnuts are fine foods.  Eat them if you like them.  If not, other nuts are also healthy.  But watch out for the calories: 50 grams provides more than 300.

Feb 6 2025

USDA’s Dietary Data Briefs: Pizza!

The USDA’s Food Surveys Research Group recently released its most recent Dietary Data Briefs based on What We Eat in America (WWEIA) data from NHANES 2020.

I went right to pizza.

Women over the age of 60 report getting nearly a third of their daily calories from pizza?

Even little kids get a fifth?

And that was before the pandemic….

I love pizza, but dietary variety anyone?

Oct 31 2023

Happy Food Politics Halloween!

Halloween is about candy, no?  Here are four thoughts on the topic.

I.  From CagleWorld.com

II.  From The CandyStore.com.

III.  From Consumer Reports: What 100 calories of Halloween candy looks like. 

 

IV.  From my son Charles, who forwarded this, I know not from where:

Enjoy the occasion!

Everything in moderation!

 

 

 

 

Oct 12 2023

Jaw-dropping food product of the season: pumpkin latte

Not being a particular fan of Dunkin’ Donuts, I somehow missed this astonishing drink.

But the esteemed journalist Eric Schlosser, sent me a link to this video tweet (oops, X).

I did not believe it, but excellent journalist that he is, Eric sent me the DUNKIN’ NUTRITION evidence.  Go to page 6 and check out the highlighted item: 930 calories and 167 grams of added sugars (but see NOTE below)

No, you could not make this up.

930 calories, by the way, is about half of what many people need in a day.

Advice: share this with friends—plural.

NOTE: a sharp eyed reader points out that it’s not a pumpkin latte; it’s a large pumpkin swirl frozen coffee with whole milk.  Whatever.

Oct 10 2023

The new obesity drugs: a threat to the food industry?

I can hardly believe this, and had to laugh when I read all the articles last week about how worried the food industry is about the new obesity drugs.

Imagine: if the drugs really do reduce appetite and interest in food—horror of horrors—people might eat less.

Eating less, as I have pointed out repeatedly, is very bad for the food business.

In Food Politics, I explained how the fundamental purpose of  food companies is to get you to eat more food, not less.

Beginning in the early 1980s, food companies did a better job of creating an “eat more” food environment.

People responded to this environment by eating more calories—lots more—and way more than enough to account for the rising prevalence of overweight and obesity.  Evidence?   See my book with Mal Nesheim, Why Calories Count: From Science to Politics.

When I am at my most cynical, I ask this question: What industry might benefit if people ate more healthfully?

I am hard pressed to think of any—certainly not the food, diet, or diet-drug industries (Novo Nordisk, maker of the semaglutide drug, Wegovy, now makes more than the gross domestic product of Denmark).

The only exception I can think of is not-for-profit HMO’s like Kaiser Permanente, which do better if their patients are healthier (and have no excuse for not paying their workers better).

Anything that helps people eat less and more healthfully is bad news for the food industry, and especially for companies making ultra-processed junk food.

No wonder companies are worried.

Here’s my collection from last week (with thanks to Lisa Young and Michele Simon for making sure I saw these articles):

Jan 5 2022

Ben & Jerry’s top flavors: in order of calories???

Ben & Jerry’s is now owned by Unilever.

Here are its top-ten best-selling flavors:

  1. Half Baked: unbaked cookie dough and baked fudge brownies.
  2. Cherry Garcia: in the top three since its launch in 1987
  3. Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough
  4. Chocolate Fudge Brownie: this contains brownies from New York’s Greyston Bakery, which provides jobs and training to low-income people in Yonkers
  5. Tonight Dough: Jimmy Fallon’s second flavor; proceeds to SeriousFun Children’s Network
  6. Strawberry Cheesecake
  7. Phish Food: since 1997
  8. Americone Dream: a partnership with Stephen Colbert, whose staff chooses the nonprofit its proceeds go to
  9. Chunky Monkey: banana ice cream with fudge chunks and walnuts
  10. Brownie Batter Core

Whether or not proceeds go to charity, these are commercial ice creams, and highly caloric, ultra-processed ones at that.

Here, for example, is the ingredient list for a Cherry Garcia.

CREAM, SKIM MILK, LIQUID SUGAR (SUGAR, WATER), WATER, CHERRIES, SUGAR, EGG YOLKS, COCONUT OIL, COCOA (PROCESSED WITH ALKALI), FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATES (COLOR), COCOA POWDER, GUAR GUM, NATURAL FLAVORS, LEMON JUICE CONCENTRATE, CARRAGEENAN, MILK FAT, SOY LECITHIN.
And here’ the Nutrition Facts label for a pint.
The new serving size is 2/3 cup and you get three of those in the container at 340 calories each.  Eat the whole pint and you’ve done half your daily calories along with 78 grams of added sugars (oops).
Half-Baked has even more!
If ever a situation called for moderation, this one is it.