Best. Diet. Study. Ever.

<p><a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/cat.mhtml?lang=en&search_source=search_form&search_tracking_id=836F2ED8-82D1-11E2-9118-67921472E43D&version=llv1&anyorall=all&safesearch=1&searchterm=unhealthy+food&search_group=&orient=&search_cat=&searchtermx=&photographer_name=&people_gender=&people_age=&people_ethnicity=&people_number=&commercial_ok=&color=&show_color_wheel=1#id=93698146&src=90C920D4-82D1-11E2-B38A-15D171D9A14D-1-18" target="_blank">Kylie Walls</a>/Shutterstock</p>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


“All calories count,” declared the voiceover in an infamous recent Coca-Cola ad. “No matter where they come from, including Coca Cola and everything else with calories.” Message: a calorie is a calorie; don’t blame our sugary drinks for your troubles!

But all calories aren’t created equal, two recent studies suggest. The first one, on sugar, is alarming; the second, on the so-called Mediterranean diet, is comforting.

Let’s get the bad news out of the way first.

In a new study published in the peer-reviewed PLOS One, a team of researchers from Stanford and the University of California looked at trends in Type 2 diabetes rates and per-capita sweetener consumption in 175 countries, controlling for a host of factors including wealth, population age, urbanization, and obesity. My colleague Mike Mechanic has the goods on what they found: The more sugar a nation consumes per-capita, the higher its diabetes rate. No other food type showed any significant association with diabetes, the authors found. They add that the correlation between sugar consumption and diabetes rates is “independent of sedentary behavior and alcohol use, and the effect was modified but not confounded by obesity or overweight.”

As for the calorie-is-a-calorie claim, get this:

Each 150 kilocalories/person/day increase in total calorie availability related to a 0.1 percent rise in diabetes prevalence (not significant), whereas a 150 kilocalories/person/day rise in sugar availability (one 12-ounce can of soft drink) was associated with a 1.1 percent rise in diabetes prevalence.

In other words, calories from sugar emerged from the study as the unique driver of Type 2 diabetes.

And how bad is diabetes? Here’s the Mayo Clinic:

[Type 2] Diabetes dramatically increases the risk of various cardiovascular problems, including coronary artery disease with chest pain (angina), heart attack, stroke, narrowing of arteries (atherosclerosis) and high blood pressure. The risk of stroke is two to four times higher for people with diabetes, and the death rate from heart disease is two to four times higher for people with diabetes than for people without the disease, according to the American Heart Association.

People with Type 2 diabetes are also vulnerable to kidney, eye, foot, and bone damage, the Mayo Clinic reports, and the health organization also points to emerging research linking insulin disorders like Type 2 diabetes to Alzheimer’s disease, a connection I wrote about here.

Okay, so if calories from sugar appear to cause grave damage, what about calories from whole foods like extra-virgin olive oil and nuts? According to a new study from Spanish researchers published in the New England Journal of Medicine, they have the opposite effect. The team looked at older people (men 55 to 80 years of age; women 60 to 80 years of age) who didn’t have cardiovascular conditions but who had a high degree of risk for them, i.e., risky conditions and habits like overweight, diabetes, and smoking.

The subjects were directed into three groups: Two of which were encouraged to switch to separate versions of the Mediterranean diet, based on minimally processed fish, olive oil, nuts, fruits, and vegetables, while the other was prodded to follow a low-fat diet. None of them were asked to restrict calories.

Here’s how the New York Times’ Gina Kolata describes the results:

About 30 percent of heart attacks, strokes and deaths from heart disease can be prevented in people at high risk if they switch to a Mediterranean diet rich in olive oil, nuts, beans, fish, fruits and vegetables, and even drink wine with meals, a large and rigorous new study has found.

The findings … were based on the first major clinical trial to measure the diet’s effect on heart risks. The magnitude of the diet’s benefits startled experts. The study ended early, after almost five years, because the results were so clear it was considered unethical to continue.

Kolata reports that before these results, some experts has “hesitated to recommend the [Mediterranean] diet to people who already had weight problems, since oils and nuts have a lot of calories.” What the study suggests, though, is that such high-calorie food actually can be healthy even for older people at risk of cardiovascular disease. Again, the food industry’s a-calorie-is-a-calorie mantra falls flat.

Here’s what New York Times food savant Mark Bittman  took away from the study:

It’s as straightforward as it is un-American: [a healthy diet is] low in red meat, low in sugar and hyperprocessed carbs, low in junk. High in just about everything else — healthful fat (especially olive oil), vegetables, fruits, legumes and what the people who designed the diet determined to be beneficial, or at least less-harmful, animal products; in this case fish, eggs and low-fat dairy.

This is real food, delicious food, mostly easy-to-make food. You can eat this way without guilt and be happy and healthy. Unless you’re committed to a diet big on junk and red meat, or you don’t like to cook, there is little downside.

But there is downside for the food industry, because following such a diet means not relying on its processed products—or its creed that all calories are created equal.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate